Anyone else surprised by the redundacy of GMs in this draft?

Andrew1984
Registered User
Joined: 06/19/2009
Posts: 1261
Points: 3431
Offline
Anyone else surprised by the redundacy of GMs in this draft?

I am all for the Best Player Available strategy in drafting, but I think it should have at least someone intersection with need. I was shocked at how many GMs in the lottery seemingly paid no attention whatsoever to their current roster. I'm NOT saying that these players weren't worthy to be drafted in these slots; just surprising that they duplicated positions.

Philly: Noel is absolutely not a four. I don't think Noel and Embiid will ever consistently share the floor. I'm not against the pick though, because taking two high-risk, high-reward gambles increases the chances that one will pay off.

Utah: They took Exum even though they just drafted Trey Burke. They'll say Exum can play the two, but I don't think Exum wants to play the two.

Boston: Took Smart even though they have Rondo, but Rondo is probably on the move, unless they manage to obtain Love, which is doubtful.

Sacramento: Took Stauskas even though they just drafted McLemore last year.

Charlotte: Took Vonleh even though they just took Cody Zeller last year.

Everyone justifies BPA with two extreme examples. They say, "Drafting for need is stupid, just look at Oden over Durant and Bowie over Jordan!" Proponents of this strategy rightly observe that by zeroing in one position of need, you can ignore massive talent that would actually have far more long-term value.

What I think they're missing, though, is the importance of actually assembling a cohesive team with players that complement each other instead of duplicating each other. If you ignore need completely and you end up with three or four players who basically all do the same thing, your team has no versatility and it is easy to defend.

Sure, the Bowie pick will always be a regret, but how many GMs have put their coaches in a difficult spot with huge logjams at certain positions and resulting deficiencies in other positions, and then their teams have gone .500 or worse? Those situations are less talked about because they're not as splashy, but I believe they're far more common.

At the same time, I do understand that it makes no sense to take the 11th best PF just because you need a PF when the 3rd best SG is on the board. I get all that. I'm just saying that need should at least be part of the conversation and it seems like it's less and less of a factor.


joecheck88
joecheck88's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 2829
Points: 2570
Offline
In all honesty I think the

In all honesty I think the guys drafted this year are better than anyone you've named sans Rondo. Talent should trump need especially in the lottery. It's when you get to the 20s you see need a little bit more. When playoff teams take a guy that can help right away in a championship run.

SpartanGlory
SpartanGlory's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/25/2013
Posts: 350
Points: 867
Offline
Assuming the players that

Assuming the players that were drafted have value, you can always trade them. So if Noel and Embiid both become good players, and really can't share the floor, then one can be traded for a better fit. I think taking BPA is usually the right way to go unless it's a playoff team drafting for something specific.

220
220's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/30/2012
Posts: 2168
Points: 6468
Offline
Regarding the picks you

Regarding the picks you mentioned the only one I find truly surprising was Nik Stauskas. I thought the Kings were happy with Ben McLemore plus Noah Vonleh was still available so that really surprised me.

With Philadelphia and Charlotte it's easy in my opinion to see why they made the picks they made...SIZE. Size is always a commodity and having the opportunity to draft big men that weren't supposed to be available to you, granted Embiid was clearly falling in the draft after his foot injury, but Vonleh's fall was a surprise. Team's always have interest in big men so if some point later on a deal needs to be made they have extra big men available. Plus Philadelphia wasn't going to pass on the guy who basically prior to his injury was looked as the consensus number one pick. If the 76ers have completely rebuild Nerlens Noel's jumper and he can hit from 15-20 consistently then he and Embiid be a good combination.

juves4783
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 1263
Points: 351
Offline
hit the nail on the head...

i agree. i was really confused by the stauskas pick. i know he showed a lot of combo skills but does anyone think sacramento thinks he can play pg?

Ballinmvp
Registered User
Joined: 03/06/2010
Posts: 496
Points: 1275
Offline
BPA should trump need 99.9%

BPA should trump need 99.9% of the time. It makes even more sense in the NBA where basketball players make plays, if you have a prospect that is better than another even if he plays a position that you don't necessarily need I think you take him.

tidho
Registered User
Joined: 01/28/2014
Posts: 241
Points: 318
Offline
Talent is more important than

Talent is more important than need, and the traditional positions seem to be more and more blurred everyday. I think that enough guys can play multiple positions that you can work around these logjams.

i'm jus so offended
i'm jus so offended's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/01/2011
Posts: 1003
Points: 2335
Offline
First sentence is spot on

First sentence is spot on

doubledribbler
Registered User
Joined: 03/02/2009
Posts: 1373
Points: 1690
Offline
Add

I am going to agree with what others are saying. Talent is more important than need. In most cases if a guy is good enough and a coach is smart enough they can find the best players enough court time. In the end everything sorts itself out. You have trades, injuries, etc that come up.

I think a lot of the cases you mention just follow a trend that everyone feels that this year's draft class is much better than the last, especially when teams are taking the exact same position player they took last year.

One team that was a head scratcher for me was OKC It felt like they were literally drafting duplicates of their roster. They basically got a Collison replacement (though I don't think McGary will ever be as good as Collison was) and a Sefolosha clone. I guess they couldn't find their new Fisher. They had quite a few nice fits and I could have even seen them consider getting a pg like Napier and moving Jackson to the starting lineup or getting a guy like Early to step in and offer some versatility. They have a nice roster, but they also have some holes they could have cheaply filled.

Registered User
Joined: 12/17/2008
Posts: 248
Points: 379
Offline
Also to further your point

the Semaj Christon pick duplicates what Reggie Jackson was before he started shooting batter.

I think they draft to replace players if they play well and will demand money, OKC then has someone else on a rookie contract with similar skills.

TheArtistPaysth...
TheArtistPaysthePrice's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/23/2012
Posts: 1176
Points: 3007
Offline
God post, I generally agree but with NBA rookies

they don't play much or effectively when they do anyway.There is no glut with McLemore and Staukas because neither will play more than 28 minutes a game. Last year McLemore played 26 minutes a game and shot 37% from 2 and 32% from 3. Those %'s will go up but the minutes probably won't.

In Boston's case Rondo is on a one year deal even if he doesn't get moved. He is going to want at least 15+ if he plays over 65 gmes this year. Besides Smart protects them if they don't want to pay Avery Bradley, who I think should get at least 3 years and 21 million. Smart duplicates Bradley's skills more than Rondo's. I would like to see a Bradley and Smart backcourt also at points, the defense could be off the chart and Boston has a few young bigs that could make up for Smart not being the best shooter. Smart and Bradley could keep guards out of the paint to protect weak interior defenders in Sullinger and Olynik or when Green plays stretch 4.

No matter who Utah picked there would have been redundancy because they have starters and prospects at every position younger than 24. So they redrafted a position that was their weakest in PG. I am a Trey Burke fan but a number of metrics rate him as the worst PG defender in the NBA. Exum has the potential to be a top tier PG defender. Burke is smart and a gamer and he will start every game he is healthy this year. Burks and Hayward handle the ball a lot also, half the game Gordon Hayward initiates the offense. Only Wiggins as a true athletic 3 would have fit perfectly in Utah and it was rumored they were going after the number 1 pick for him not Jabari. Trey Burke is small also and may not play 82 games a year in his career.

Cody Zeller played much better later in the season last year but played every game and averaged 17 minutes per game. Even if his mpg's increase 33% and he is playing 25 minutes a game that leaves alot minutes for Vonleh, who I think could be a wider young Chris Bosh in four years. The steal of the draft in my opinion.

I didn't like what Philly did but Embiid seems a better prospect than Drummond and Drummond could have been traded for the #1. The fact they didn't draft a lottery pick that will play for them this year is ridiculous because they had two.

How many rookies drafted in the last 5 years are in the top 10 at there position in the league in production not potential. Maybe like 12 guys or so, so redundancy.

3 No Biases 3
3 No Biases 3's picture
Registered User
Joined: 01/23/2013
Posts: 246
Points: 518
Offline
I actually agree with every

I actually agree with every part of this post. I was thinking the same thing on draft night. While I agree talent outweighs need, there is no certainty that those players are more talented than the guys they passed up in a position of need. This was a much anticipated draft but it turned into a lame one. Most of these rosters look like sh** now with clusterf***s at certain positions.

Ollstar
Registered User
Joined: 06/19/2009
Posts: 304
Points: 486
Offline
Drafting BPA over a need is

Drafting BPA over a need is like buying a winter jacket in summer. You probably won't value it currently as much as you will in the future but you will be happy you paid what you did when you did.

burgessfour
Registered User
Joined: 06/14/2010
Posts: 361
Points: 394
Offline
The Stauskas pick

really surprised me. I get that the Kings can eventually trade one of them but I don't see how either gets enough minutes
to pump up their value since they're both clearly SG's. I can live with Philly taking Embiid because if he's healthy he's the top pick, and he may be able to play enough 4 for both of them to get 30+ minutes a night.

RSS: Syndicate content