[Seamo15Participant]

 Players like Dirk, Shaq, LeBron and Howard are one of a kind. There are obvious similarities with Shaq and Howard, but that’s about it. My question is, being so individual , does the hunt by GMs for the next Dirk or LeBron cost them far more than it pays off? There have been multiple situations where a player has been drafted on who they could be ( Kwame/Shaq, Oden/Shaq, Tyrus Thomas/Garnett, 100 European Big men shooters/Dirk). In saying all this, is Andre Drummond , slated by some to be the next Dwight Howard another case of this scenario? 

[Raef LaFrentzParticipant]

Absolutely it does. But sometimes it pays off…

[Seamo15Participant]

Do you think the pay off outweighs the mistakes?

[Raef LaFrentzParticipant]

Well it has been far more common that the GM’s making the pick end up getting a guy that is different from who they thought they were getting (Morrison, Kwame, etc.). So no, the pay off doesn’t outweigh the numerous mistakes over the years.

[Seamo15Participant]

 Yeah good point. I suppose when guys model there games after and proclaim in interviews that they are like that player, then GMs can certainly get see something that might not be there

[alex23Participant]

a lot of  times it hurts teams but at other times there are still some great players that live up to their potential and some gms are usually willing to take the risk.. (russell westbrook for example) a player that had potential due to his attributes but some people said he shouldnt have went that high , but look how it turned out…

[JoeWolf1]

#1 picks are by far the most productive pick in draft history.  I recently evaluated the #1,2 and 3 picks of the past 20 years and there were significantly more players picked #1 who put up great numbers and had good careers than guys who busted.

The same with picks 2 and 3, but with less production and more busts.  Still, over the last 20 years drafting a guy at 1,2 or 3 have the highest chance of them panning out to become very productive pros.

Sure you get Joe Smith in 1995, but you had Derrick Coleman (20/10 rookie)  Larry Johnson (20/10 rookie) Shaq (HOF) and Glen Robinson ( multiple All-Star) before him and Allen Iverson(HOF) and Tim Duncan(HOF) directly after.

Hindsight is 20/20 but you gotta take the #1 consensus player if you have the 1st pick in particular.  The chances of you getting burt are much lower than you getting a guy who is going to make a couple all-star teams.

8 of the 24 members of the 2012 All-Star game were top 3 picks.  

12 of the 24 members of the 2012 All-Star game were top 5 picks.

17 of the 24 members of the 2012 All-Star game were top 10 picks.

There are obviously very talented players chosen outside of the top picks, but there is a much greater chance your draft pick is going to pan out if you’re picking high.  Risk is part of the game, but could you imagine if the Magic passed on consensus #1 Dwight Howard for a "safer more seasoned" Emeka Okafor? 

[B-ball fanParticipant]

I think that the pay off does.  Sure, there are more Kwame Browns than Dwight Howards, but in order to win a championship, you need elite players.  You don’t get that by never taking a risk in the draft.  It is better to shoot high and miss than to shoot low.  Of course, that is an oversimplification, as to a certain extent you need to scout the players without preconceived notions about their potential or risk, and just take the BPA.

[WinterSoldierParticipant]

 Well every team makes misstakes the hope is that they learn from there misstakes which some teams seem to and others seem not to. I think the worst thing for fans is teams that don’t ever learn from there misstakes.

[Author]

Posts