If you were a GM
how would you go about the draft?
Would you take best player available?
Do you draft the guy with the most potential?
Do you draft on needs?
Would a guys attitude and off the court issues, cause you not to draft him?
I know a lot depends on the team that is drafting, but let's say all teams are equal.
all of the above. Seriously, i've always said you have to take everything into account. I would like to take the best player available, but position and how they fit the team is important as well. For example, tyreke is defenitely better then Harden. But I think the thunder would take harden again if they had the chance, he is the perfect fit for that team and doesn't demand the ball. But 29 other teams would probably rather tyreke.
It really depends on what pick you have. If you have a top 3 pick, then I feel that you have to take the best player available. I would draft the guy with the most potential but you have to be willing to work with him for a while. I would draft on needs only if I feel that the players that are still available are not talented enough talent and I felt that I could pass them up. A guys attitude and off the court issues would cause me not to draft them only if I felt that I could pass up on them.
If all teams are equal, then I think you have to go with the best player available. As far as head cases, it would definitely have an effect on me drafting a player.
Do you think GM's think about their own jobs when picking guys who need more time? When you draft a guy that needs time, (example a guy like Thabeet) by the time that guy starts producing- the GM could already be on his way out.
^ Good point, alot of GM's probably do that because that could put a big blemish on their track record and possibly force them out a job
I probably wouldn't be able to handle being a GM.. I would love to try but all, and I mean ALL the pressure is on YOU.