All you tankers should be ashamed of yourselves

[Guest]

No one has talked about the top 8 as can't miss franchise changers to my knowledge. Every year has high drafted busts. Heck, the #2 pick in 2004 was Darko Milicic.

The last two All-NBA teams breakdown like this:

2012-13

First Team:

#1 overall, #1 overall, #2 overall, #4 overall, #13 overall

Second Team:

#1 overall, #3 overall, #3 overall, #28 overall, #48 overall

Third Team:

#1 overall, #3 overall, #5 overall, #10 overall, #30 overall

4 #1 picks (27%); 10 top 5 picks (67%); 13 lottery picks (87%); 1 first round pick outside the lottery (7%); 1 second round pick (7%)

2011-12

First Team:

#1, #1, #2, #4, #13

Second Team:

#1, #3, #5, #10, #28

Third Team:

#2, #3, #5, #9, #21

3 #1 picks (20%); 10 top 5 picks (67%); 13 lottery picks (87%); 2 first round pick outside the lottery (13%); 0 second round picks (0%)

2010-11

First Team:

#1, #1, #1, #2, #13

Second Team:

#3, #3, #5, #9, #9

Third Team:

#2, #3, #4, #19, #57

3 #1 picks (20%); 10 top 5 picks (67%); 13 lottery picks (87%); 1 first round pick outside the lottery (7%); 1 second round pick (7%)

THREE YEAR CONSOLIDATED NUMBERS:

First Team: 80% Top 5 Picks; 100% Lottery Picks

Second Team: 60% Top 5 Picks; 80% Lottery Picks

Third Team: 60% Top 5 Picks; 73% Lottery Picks

Overall:

22% #1 Overall Picks

67% Top 5 Overall Picks

87% Lottery Picks

7% First Round Picks Outside The Lottery

3% Second Round Picks

Read through this thread

I guess my question was not clear - I'm asking out of the top 8 picks in ANY given year, how many are leading their teams to winning records/playoffs etc.

For example: 2009 Draft/Top 8: Griffin, Thabeet, Harden, Evans, Rubio, Flynn, Curry and Hill. So that's 3 of 8 who has their teams in playoffs.

2008: 2 of 8

2007: 3 of 8

2006: 1 of 8

I'm just saying it's more likely than not - that at least half of the top 8 will be role players, maybe even less.

[ViperXX79]

So if they are going to leave why draft them?

But that's the whole point. All these great players left because they went to teams that had a great young prospect that came from a high lottery pick. That's how you get the Lebrons and Shaqs to come to you as free agents. These guys wanted to play with another great talent not stay on teams that they had to carry by themselves. We have to get a great talent to attract that big free agent or two. They aren't coming to play with Horford and Teague or our coach. And they certainly don't care about how hard we tried in another first round playoff exit.

[Guest]

But that's the whole point. All these great players left because they went to teams that had a great young prospect that came from a high lottery pick. That's how you get the Lebrons and Shaqs to come to you as free agents. These guys wanted to play with another great talent not stay on teams that they had to carry by themselves. We have to get a great talent to attract that big free agent or two. They aren't coming to play with Horford and Teague or our coach. And they certainly don't care about how hard we tried in another first round playoff exit.

LeBron went to a team that did not have anything except a 30yo Wade...not sure how that is applicable to your statement.

But my nonserious statement also refers to players like Marvin, CP3, D-Will, Bogut, Tyrus Thomas, Shelden, Evan Turner, Bargnani, etc. The point is people move, let's focus on that. It is not the case that you can grab a superstar through the draft and be done with it. You need to build a team and there are many ways to do it. The draft is just one way and you do not *have to* take that path. Let's not tie our hands together and only think we can acquire talent through the draft.

[AHF]

First Team:

#1 overall, #1 overall, #2 overall, #4 overall, #13 overall

Second Team:

#1 overall, #3 overall, #3 overall, #28 overall, #48 overall

Third Team:

#1 overall, #3 overall, #5 overall, #10 overall, #30 overall

4 #1 picks (27%); 10 top 5 picks (67%); 13 lottery picks (87%); 1 first round pick outside the lottery (7%); 1 second round pick (7%)

I am missing something here. I see 3 picks outside the lottery at 28, 30, and 48. Which is two 1st round picks 28 and 30 and one 2nd round pick 48.

You are right I put one in the wrong bucket.

[MrMeltdown]

There are several oppurtunities this offseason to aquire a star including trading Dennis,Bebe, 15th, and future picks to get up as high as you can to get Embiid, Parker, Wiggins, or Randle. I would rather stay at 15 if we can't get one of those.

Kevin Love is also floating out there. There was never any reason to tank. Next year we could end up with a lottery pick if Pierce and Garnett move on, Lopez does not come back strong from his injury and Deron does not come back strong from having ankle surgery on both legs.

We will have several oppurtunities over the next couple of years to quench your thirst for attention grabbing stars. Personally, I am okay without such players.

[GameTime]

There are several oppurtunities this offseason to aquire a star including trading Dennis,Bebe, 15th, and future picks to get up as high as you can to get Embiid, Parker, Wiggins, or Randle. I would rather stay at 15 if we can't get one of those.

Kevin Love is also floating out there. There was never any reason to tank. Next year we could end up with a lottery pick if Pierce and Garnett move on, Lopez does not come back strong from his injury and Deron does not come back strong from having ankle surgery on both legs.

We will have several oppurtunities over the next couple of years to quench your thirst for attention grabbing stars. Personally, I am okay without such players.

Amen Meltdown. We are sitting in good shape right now. Lucas and Dennis were top 10 prospects in last year's draft. We acquired both with the 16th and 17th (value steals). Both of these players have tremendous value and can net us a star if the cards are played right.

[HawkItus]

Read through this thread

I guess my question was not clear - I'm asking out of the top 8 picks in ANY given year, how many are leading their teams to winning records/playoffs etc.

For example: 2009 Draft/Top 8: Griffin, Thabeet, Harden, Evans, Rubio, Flynn, Curry and Hill. So that's 3 of 8 who has their teams in playoffs.

2008: 2 of 8

2007: 3 of 8

2006: 1 of 8

I'm just saying it's more likely than not - that at least half of the top 8 will be role players, maybe even less.

Exactly my point. @AHF is only cherry picking the successes for All-NBA. Yes, they compose the most the majority of the team, but what percentage of their peers from lottery to lottery never even make the playoffs with their respective teems. Annnnnnnnd how many are on the same team? All NBA is a subjective vote the highly rates winning. A team with multiple stars and deep playoff runs have multiple All-NBA guys

LeBron went to a team that did not have anything except a 30yo Wade...not sure how that is applicable to your statement.

But my nonserious statement also refers to players like Marvin, CP3, D-Will, Bogut, Tyrus Thomas, Shelden, Evan Turner, Bargnani, etc. The point is people move, let's focus on that. It is not the case that you can grab a superstar through the draft and be done with it. You need to build a team and there are many ways to do it. The draft is just one way and you do not *have to* take that path. Let's not tie our hands together and only think we can acquire talent through the draft.

Yes. Well said.

And on this Paul Pierce thing. Al Horford is comparable to early Paul Pierce. Not in game style, but stature. People keep saying he can't attract free agents. If PP can he can.

[Guest]

Exactly my point. @AHF is only cherry picking the successes for All-NBA. Yes, they compose the most the majority of the team, but what percentage of their peers from lottery to lottery never even make the playoffs with their respective teems. Annnnnnnnd how many are on the same team? All NBA is a subjective vote the highly rates winning. A team with multiple stars and deep playoff runs have multiple All-NBA guys

Yes. Well said.

And on this Paul Pierce thing. Al Horford is comparable to early Paul Pierce. Not in game style, but stature. People keep saying he can't attract free agents. If PP can he can.

I don't remember PP attracting FA's - Ainge was contemplating trading him then the TRADE for KG and Ray happened.

Had that trade not happened - it's highly doubtful any of them would have had a ring.

Edited May 23, 2014 by JayBirdHawk

[HawkItus]

I don't remember PP attracting FA's - Ainge was contemplating trading him then the TRADE for KG and Ray happened.

Had that trade not happened - it's highly doubtful any of them would have had a ring.

My point. lol People act like having PP got the Celtics KG and Shuttlesworth.

[High5]

The Spurs are crushing it with 38-year-old Duncan giving them 16.5/8.5/1.9 and having every other player in their rotation (all 12) drafted 15th or later. Much later in most cases. The Pacers only have two players drafted in the lottery. One is garbage (the 2nd pick worth tanking for!) and one is an All Star (the 10th pick).

So I don't really buy the idea that a team with Al Horford needs to tank or would have been better off tanking. Horford in a very new situation was giving us 18.6/8.4/2.6 on .567 shooting before his injury. We have room to pursue a solid starter and we have the 15th pick which has been high enough to draft all but 3 players on the two #1 seeds. And lets not forget our own All Star this season was drafted 47th.

[AHF]

My point. lol People act like having PP got the Celtics KG and Shuttlesworth.

Lottery assets got them KG and Shuttlesworth. Without those picks, they don't get those players.

The smaller trade was Ray Allen for the #5 overall pick.

You realize you need lottery picks in order to have lottery picks to trade, right? The #15 pick wouldn't have gotten that done.

Same thing with James Harden (two lottery picks - one already drafted and one future - got him); Carmelo Anthony (two lottery picks plus the possibility of a third in 2016); Deron Williams (two lottery picks plus another first rounder); etc.

So if the goal is to get a superstar, you have three routes:

(1) Free Agency - Anybody think legit stars (not fringe All-Stars like JJ) are signing here without us having a piece to attract them? No? Me neither.

(2) Trades - Anyone see the multiple lottery picks that landed Harden, Anthony, Williams, etc.? No? Me neither.

(3) Draft - Let's keep laughing at the fact that the All-NBA is mostly top 5 picks and almost all lottery picks. We don't care about having guys good enough to be All-NBA right? We can get bounced in the first and second round just fine without those guys.

So what is the end goal here?

I agree we don't need lottery assets if we are content be an also ran. For people who are fine to see us rinse and repeat the last 6 years, then we are in great shape.

If the end goal is winning a championship, you better spend your time looking at how those championship teams are built and you won't see any of them resembling the fringe All-Star model we are using. The question then becomes how to upgrade the talent and get that star and we are back where we started.

Free agency? Not happening.

Trade? Possible but unlikely. At least we can hope here because teams do stupid things with picks that turn into stars but for directly getting a star there aren't many precedents for getting those guys without lottery picks.

Draft? Do we think we are on a path to do this without lottery picks? Odds are low and we have to start drafting much, much better than we have ever drafted before. I think the "middle of the pack" picks approach is not a winner but people can at least point out the anecdotal examples of studs like Tony Parker falling out of the lottery.

[AHF]

The Spurs are crushing it with 38-year-old Duncan giving them 16.5/8.5/1.9 and having every other player in their rotation (all 12) drafted 15th or later. Much later in most cases. The Pacers only have two players drafted in the lottery. One is garbage (the 2nd pick worth tanking for!) and one is an All Star (the 10th pick).

So I don't really buy the idea that a team with Al Horford needs to tank or would have been better off tanking. Horford in a very new situation was giving us 18.6/8.4/2.6 on .567 shooting before his injury. We have room to pursue a solid starter and we have the 15th pick which has been high enough to draft all but 3 players on the two #1 seeds. And lets not forget our own All Star this season was drafted 47th.

Duncan should not be compared to Horford. Multiple MVP, Finals MVP, and championship winner compared to a guy who has never emerged from the second round of the playoffs, never been MVP, never been finals MVP, and has zero All-Star or All-NBA appearances in the last 3 seasons being the engine that wins us a championship. Heck, he has as many seasons lost to injury as All-Star appearances.

Now don't get me wrong - I love Horford, but I am realistic about the fact that he is a supporting player on a championship team. If he is your best player, then you can book your vacation plans for round 3 of the playoffs because you won't be playing beyond there. Same for Sap. Great piece of the puzzle. Both are important players who are fantastic assets for your team, but they won't be leading you to a championship. They play the sorts of roles that Horace Grant (14.2 ppg, .572 FG%, 10.0 rpg), Otis Thorpe (14.0 ppg, .561 FG%, 10.6 rpg), Chris Bosh (18.7 ppg, .496 FG%, 8.3 rpg), Pau Gasol (18.9 ppg, .567 FG%, 9.6 rpg), etc. played on championship teams - key supporting pieces to the real star(s) of those teams.

They are not the championship engines.

[High5]

Duncan should not be compared to Horford. Multiple MVP, Finals MVP, and championship winner compared to a guy who has never emerged from the second round of the playoffs, never been MVP, never been finals MVP, and has zero All-Star or All-NBA appearances in the last 3 seasons being the engine that wins us a championship. Heck, he has as many seasons lost to injury as All-Star appearances.

Now don't get me wrong - I love Horford, but I am realistic about the fact that he is a supporting player on a championship team. If he is your best player, then you can book your vacation plans for round 3 of the playoffs because you won't be playing beyond there. Same for Sap. Great piece of the puzzle. Both are important players who are fantastic assets for your team, but they won't be leading you to a championship. They play the sorts of roles that Horace Grant (14.2 ppg, .572 FG%, 10.0 rpg), Otis Thorpe (14.0 ppg, .561 FG%, 10.6 rpg), Chris Bosh (18.7 ppg, .496 FG%, 8.3 rpg), Pau Gasol (18.9 ppg, .567 FG%, 9.6 rpg), etc. played on championship teams - key supporting pieces to the real star(s) of those teams.

They are not the championship engines.

Prime Horford can absolutely be compared to 38-year-old Duncan.

[ag82]

Prime Horford can absolutely be compared to 38-year-old Duncan.

That's not necessarily the best endorsement and sadly 38 year old Duncan has been playing a lot more minutes over the last 3 years than Prime Horford.

I may be the only one on here that is worried about Al being injury prone. Averaging about 1300 minutes a season over the last few years. I'm a huge fan of Al and would love to see him back to his prime self, but I can't say with 100% certainty that we are going to get prime Al back and healthy for a full season right now.

[AHF]

Prime Horford can absolutely be compared to 38-year-old Duncan.

Let's look at that two ways, per minute and total volume:

On a per minute basis here is how they rank the last 3 years:

Duncan 24.4 PER 2012-13

Duncan 22.5 PER 2011-12

Horford 22.0 PER 2013-14

Duncan 21.3 PER 2013-14

Horford 19.8 PER 2012-13

Horford 19.0 PER 2011-12

So the winner on a per minute basis is.....Tim Duncan.

Now let's apply that to reality as far as total production.

Horford has played 123 total games the last 3 seasons.

Duncan has played 250 total games the last 3 seasons.

Tim Duncan wins again, more than doubling Horford total production.

By the way, Duncan's production is still growing for 2013-14 so the gap is still growing.

[Guest]

Prime Horford can absolutely be compared to 38-year-old Duncan.

No.

[High5]

1) Obviously if Horford keeps tearing his pectoral muscles he's in trouble. That's a rare injury, though, and for it to happen on both sides is basically unheard of. Maybe that's a sign of a deeper issue or maybe Horford was simply unlucky. It's hard to tell at this point. We aren't dealing with chronic leg injuries like Bynum or Oden. Horford heals from his surgery, works back into shape, and is back to 100%. No training wheels or kiddy gloves needed.

2) What do PER numbers from previous seasons have to do with comparing the two today? This season Horford had a better PER, so that doesn't exactly help your argument. Not that I believe PER is a great way to crown a winner.

If you believe Horford will never be capable of putting up 16.5/8.5/2 in the playoffs and having a comparable impact to 38-year-old Duncan (not defensively, but overall), then ok, but I strongly disagree. I think Horford is just now entering his prime and for the first time he's playing in a real quality NBA system.

[High5]

No.

Can anyone give a reason? Other than accomplishments and statistics from previous seasons? Horford will never be able to defend the paint quite like Duncan can even at his advanced age, but is Horford not a comparable or superior offensive player? Is he not a superior athlete? Can he not offer comparable or superior defense outside of the paint? Is he not a comparable rebounder and passer? Can he not help this team spread the floor and can he not help Teague play to his potential? I worry about Horford coming up short in postseasons past, but this is a brand new Hawks team.

I'm not saying anyone is wrong, but I'd like to see more than "Duncan had a better PER in 2013."

Don't get me wrong, though, the Hawks have a lot of work to do before we can think of comparing the two teams. But when talking about present day Duncan, I don't think he has the big advantage over Horford that many seem to believe.

[AHF]

1) Obviously if Horford keeps tearing his pectoral muscles he's in trouble. That's a rare injury, though, and for it to happen on both sides is basically unheard of. Maybe that's a sign of a deeper issue or maybe Horford was simply unlucky. It's hard to tell at this point. We aren't dealing with chronic leg injuries like Bynum or Oden. Horford heals from his surgery, works back into shape, and is back to 100%. No training wheels or kiddy gloves needed.

2) What do PER numbers from previous seasons have to do with comparing the two today? This season Horford had a better PER, so that doesn't exactly help your argument. Not that I believe PER is a great way to crown a winner.

If you believe Horford will never be capable of putting up 16.5/8.5/2 in the playoffs and having a comparable impact to 38-year-old Duncan (not defensively, but overall), then ok, but I strongly disagree. I think Horford is just now entering his prime and for the first time he's playing in a real quality NBA system.

Want to focus on small sample size like Horford's few games this season and ignore his injury? Let's focus on "today."

Duncan is putting up better numbers in the playoffs this season than Horford ever has. Duncan has a playoff 21.4 PER to Horford's most recent playoff 19.1 PER (career high 20.1 PER, career avg. 16.0 PER). Similarly, Duncan is putting up a .211 WS/48 during the playoffs while Horford's most recent is .136 WS/48 (career high .144 WS/48, career average .099 WS/48).

All 3 of Duncan's last 3 playoff appearances are better Horford's career highs and are better than his career averages by 33-100%.

So focusing on Duncan's performance "today" doesn't help him at all, IMO - especially when Horford couldn't even set foot on the court to play if he were a Spur "today."

[High5]

Want to focus on small sample size like Horford's few games this season and ignore his injury? Let's focus on "today."

Duncan is putting up better numbers in the playoffs this season than Horford ever has. Duncan has a playoff 21.4 PER to Horford's most recent playoff 19.1 PER (career high 20.1 PER, career avg. 16.0 PER). Similarly, Duncan is putting up a .211 WS/48 during the playoffs while Horford's most recent is .136 WS/48 (career high .144 WS/48, career average .099 WS/48).

All 3 of Duncan's last 3 playoff appearances are better Horford's career highs and are better than his career averages by 33-100%.

So focusing on Duncan's performance "today" doesn't help him at all, IMO - especially when Horford couldn't even set foot on the court to play if he were a Spur "today."

You're the one who brought up PER for 2013-2014, not me. I don't think the stat is all that meaningful. Drummond is the 13th best player in the NBA according to PER. If Horford carried his 22 PER the rest of the year he would have been 14th. And maybe he carries that throughout the postseason, maybe he has a 25 PER, we don't know. And, to be honest, I've never given much thought to win shares. Especially when you want to break it down to WS/48, which has a host of players in the top 20 that you would never call top 20 players. Breaking it down further to an incomplete postseason seems even more pointless. Sorry for my ignorance on that statistic. Maybe the win shares prove Duncan is a better player today, but everything else seems to point to it being a close race.