Official Game Thread: Hawks at Jazz

[thecampster]

Last year's NBA champ GSW - top 3 players by ppg

Curry - Draft slot 7

Durant - Draft slot 2 but signed as a FA

Thompson - Draft slot 11

 

2016 champ's Cavs

Lebron - draft slot 1 but signed as F/A

Irving - draft slot 1

Love - draft slot 5

 

2015 champs Warriors

Curry, Thompson and Draymond Green draft slot 35.

 

2014 - SA Spurs

Parker - draft slot 28

Duncan - Draft slot 1

Leonard - Draft slot 15

 

My point - Lebron was a F/A.  of the last 4 NBA champions, only Duncan and Irving were drafted #1 overall and were still playing where originally drafted.  Drafting #1 is vastly overvalued as opposed to drafting well and managing the cap via signings.  In each of the last 4 champions, one theme exists. Each added valuable pieces through free agency and lower draft picks. Getting all bent out of shape over the 2nd vs 5th selection is crazy.  Managing the cap, relations with potential free agents, player perception and scouting are all more important to the ultimate prize.

Without signing Durant, GSW does not win last year. Without bringing back Lebron, Cleveland does not win in 16. Without Hitting home runs on Thompson and Green, and assembling Iggy, Barnes, Bogut Livingston GSW doesn't win their 1st and without long shots Parker and Ginobilli being who they are, San Antonio doesn't win 14.  All were won with acquisitions and scouting...not because of the #1 selection.

[AHF]

Why the fixation on the #1 pick?  It provides the most value on average but there is plenty of value in other picks.  Neither LeBron nor Durant join those teams but for the lottery pick talent on the rosters.  GS build without the #1 overall pick but their league leading offense was driven by their lottery splash brothers.  The string of lottery picks brought LeBron (he was confident in winning rings with Kyrie and TT and the value Wiggins could bring).

Having the #1 pick means no one is off the board.  That means you still need to maximize the pick and you still need to get lucky with who is available in that draft class.  It isn't a panacea - just the highest expected value of the high value lottery.

[davis171]

9 hours ago, thecampster said:

Last year's NBA champ GSW - top 3 players by ppg

Curry - Draft slot 7

Durant - Draft slot 2 but signed as a FA

Thompson - Draft slot 11

 

2016 champ's Cavs

Lebron - draft slot 1 but signed as F/A

Irving - draft slot 1

Love - draft slot 5

 

2015 champs Warriors

Curry, Thompson and Draymond Green draft slot 35.

 

2014 - SA Spurs

Parker - draft slot 28

Duncan - Draft slot 1

Leonard - Draft slot 15

 

My point - Lebron was a F/A.  of the last 4 NBA champions, only Duncan and Irving were drafted #1 overall and were still playing where originally drafted.  Drafting #1 is vastly overvalued as opposed to drafting well and managing the cap via signings.  In each of the last 4 champions, one theme exists. Each added valuable pieces through free agency and lower draft picks. Getting all bent out of shape over the 2nd vs 5th selection is crazy.  Managing the cap, relations with potential free agents, player perception and scouting are all more important to the ultimate prize.

Without signing Durant, GSW does not win last year. Without bringing back Lebron, Cleveland does not win in 16. Without Hitting home runs on Thompson and Green, and assembling Iggy, Barnes, Bogut Livingston GSW doesn't win their 1st and without long shots Parker and Ginobilli being who they are, San Antonio doesn't win 14.  All were won with acquisitions and scouting...not because of the #1 selection.

Dude in 2015 they did a study and since 1980 27 of 35 (77%)#1 picks had at least been an all star once where the next closest was #3 at under 50%. #1 produces the most talent historically and every number ever shows it.

[Peoriabird]

I haven't been following this thread but is someone arguing that we should avoid the 1st pick in the draft?

[KB21]

43 minutes ago, davis171 said:

Dude in 2015 they did a study and since 1980 27 of 35 (77%)#1 picks had at least been an all star once where the next closest was #3 at under 50%. #1 produces the most talent historically and every number ever shows it.

Producing the most talent doesn't equal producing championships.

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

Producing the most talent doesn't equal producing championships.

Doesn't hurt

[KB21]

2 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Doesn't hurt

Only 3 #1 overall picks have won the championship with the team that drafted them.

[Peoriabird]

Just now, KB21 said:

Only 3 #1 overall picks have won the championship with the team that drafted them.

So you don't want great assets?

[KB21]

Just now, Peoriabird said:

So you don't want great assets?

So, what is the goal here?  Collecting assets or winning a championship?  

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

So, what is the goal here?  Collecting assets or winning a championship?  

I think you need them to be in the discussion

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, KB21 said:

So, what is the goal here?  Collecting assets or winning a championship?  

Kinda hard to win a championship with no assets or bad ones.  You do agree with that right?

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Kinda hard to win a championship with no assets or bad ones.  You do agree with that right?

History tells us that the #1 overall pick doesn't produce championships for teams that get them.  I prefer to pay attention to history.

[Peoriabird]

Just now, KB21 said:

History tells us that the #1 overall pick doesn't produce championships for teams that get them.  I prefer to pay attention to history.

History also tell us that you need great players to compete for championships whether you get them thru the draft, trade or free agency.

[Peoriabird]

I get the impression that you prefer not to have the #1 pick in the draft.  Don't know why...Maybe you think there is some curse associated with the pick or something. LOL!  But once you have the #1 pick, you control the draft.  You can do anything you want with it. Trade if for a player, trade down, pick the best player etc.  I don't see the downside..please enlighten me.

[KB21]

Just now, Peoriabird said:

I get the impression that you prefer not to have the #1 pick in the draft.  Don't know why...Maybe you think there is some curse associated with the pick or something. LOL!  But once you have the #1 pick, you control the draft.  You can do anything you want with it. Trade if for a player, trade down, pick the best player etc.  I don't see the downside..please enlighten me.

I don't really care which pick we get, quite honestly.  Whether it's 1 or 6, the player we take isn't going to make an impact on winning anytime soon.

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, KB21 said:

I don't really care which pick we get, quite honestly.  Whether it's 1 or 6, the player we take isn't going to make an impact on winning anytime soon.

So you don't want him right?  You would prefer Millsap over this year 1st pick in the draft right?

[KB21]

4 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So you don't want him right?  You would prefer Millsap over this year 1st pick in the draft right?

I would prefer having Millsap in conjunction with a young player that can develop behind him.  Yes.

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

I would prefer having Millsap in conjunction with a young player that can develop behind him.  Yes.

And if you were the GM of the Hawks and offered that trade to Denver, do you think they would take it?

[Peoriabird]

19 minutes ago, KB21 said:

I would prefer having Millsap in conjunction with a young player that can develop behind him.  Yes.

Let me put it this way...Denver offers you Millsap and their lottery pick for Atlanta pick and fillers to make the salaries work....Would you do it?

[lethalweapon3]

Great game, Dennis!

This whole other scintillating discussion can be picked up in The tank thread.

~lw3