All-Time NBA Draft: Discussion

[beanfigger]

I like the versatile styles of play I have in the big guys I have as well. Low post scoring, shooting, and athleticism, but they can all fill it up.

Your team is pretty stacked too. They are more of the banger type, but you have a lot of depth.

Considering I waited until Round 4 to grab my first 4/5 guy, I'm definitely happy with how it all worked out for me value-wise. Stoudemire might have been overkill, but his stats in Phoenix when he was All-NBA all those years are crazy.

[Birdest]

I hope he doesn't take my pick.

[-Truth-]

Could be a little early for Curry, but I needed somebody to stretch the floor and Curry has a chance to go down as the 3rd best three point shooter in NBA history. Underrated passer too, and there's enough defense between the SG reserves to keep the backcourt from being a liability in that department.

Edited September 13, 2014 by -Truth-

[beanfigger]

Wilkens. Last Top 50 player, and we're 116 picks in. Bargain shopping.

Edited September 13, 2014 by beanfigger

[beanfigger]

Could be a little early for Curry, but I needed somebody to stretch the floor and Curry has a chance to go down as the 3rd best three point shooter in NBA history. Underrated passer too, and there's enough defense between the SG reserves to keep the backcourt from being a liability in that department.

 

With all the young players that are being selected, Curry needs to be on somebody's team with those skills.

[Birdest]

Wilkens. Last Top 50 player, and we're 116 picks in. Bargain shopping.

Great pick. It was him or Issel but I picked Issel because I really needed to get my stretch 4 guy to let Shaq go wild.

I was gonna go with him the next round if he wasn't taken because he's one of the best playmakers of all time.

[Birdest]

And I remember Truth saying that ABA years are counted so I just picked a guy who is 9th on all time points scored.

 

I really liked the Stephen Curry pick too, I think he has the chance to go down as the greatest shooter in nba history.

[beanfigger]

Great pick. It was him or Issel but I picked Issel because I really needed to get my stretch 4 guy to let Shaq go wild.

I was gonna go with him the next round if he wasn't taken because he's one of the best playmakers of all time.

Issel is yet another solid pick. If I hadn't gone so long earlier without guard depth, he certainly would've been considered in these last few rounds.

[MoveThoseChains]

Wanted another big man/stretch 4. Love is arguably the best PF in the game right now. Don't love his defense, but his offense will be a spark off the bench. My PF depth is pretty strong with McHale, Jerry Lucas, and Love.

Edited September 13, 2014 by MoveThoseChains

[beanfigger]

Wanted another big man/stretch 4. Love is arguably the best PF in the game right now. Don't love his defense, but his offense will be a spark off the bench. My PF depth is pretty strong with McHale, Jerry Lucas, and Love.

Really good pick. Seeing so many of today's players go simply because they were today's players, it actually makes me feel better that guys like Love, who are deserving to be selected in a draft like this, are getting taken now.

[gabefergy]

Really good pick. Seeing so many of today's players go simply because they were today's players, it actually makes me feel better that guys like Love, who are deserving to be selected in a draft like this, are getting taken now.

I'm not sure I understand this. What makes Love different from other players in today's NBA?

[beanfigger]

I'm not sure I understand this. What makes Love different from other players in today's NBA?

 

I'm just suggesting that he's better than some of the players from today's NBA that were already drafted, including some really early on. I didn't mention anyone by name so you shouldn't assume I'm talking about anyone in particular, but this is just my opinion. I think if we did this in 15 years with a younger crowd, there is a better chance for Kevin Love to be selected than some of the other contemporary players who wouldn't stick out as much in the minds of those who didn't watch them growing up. Of course, there would be a ton of other selections of pretty good players who are in their primes during that draft that you could say the same thing about.

Edited September 13, 2014 by beanfigger

[gabefergy]

I'm just suggesting that he's better than some of the players from today's NBA that were already drafted, including some really early on. I didn't mention anyone by name so you shouldn't assume I'm talking about anyone in particular, but this is just my opinion. I think if we did this in 15 years with a younger crowd, there is a better chance for Kevin Love to be selected than some of the other contemporary players who wouldn't stick out as much in the minds of those who didn't watch them growing up. Of course, there would be a ton of other selections of pretty good players who are in their primes during that draft that you could say the same thing about.

Well, Love is definitely a good player so I think he could have been taken a little earlier. However, his career is still pretty short and it's been a bit up and down. You'd like to think he will only get better but statistically he might have already peaked. I think there is a good chance he ends up winning a title in Cleveland though. I'm not sure what players you think he is better than that have already gone, but I don't think that's accurate. There may have been one or two players taken a little early, but overall there have been more reaches on some of the old school players than modern day imo.

[beanfigger]

Well, Love is definitely a good player so I think he could have been taken a little earlier. However, his career is still pretty short and it's been a bit up and down. You'd like to think he will only get better but statistically he might have already peaked. I think there is a good chance he ends up winning a title in Cleveland though. I'm not sure what players you think he is better than that have already gone, but I don't think that's accurate. There may have been one or two players taken a little early, but overall there have been more reaches on some of the old school players than modern day imo.

That's a very different opinion. If you feel the fact that we are as we should be in having about as many players taken from the last 18-25 of the league than there are players from the first 43-50 years (talking about when players were in their primes), then you certainly differ from me in my way of thinking. Players are bigger and faster now because of improved training methods, scientific advances and the fact that they get paid enough to make basketball their full-time job and sole source of income, but it's unfair to just take that to mean they are better than the older guys. We have to try and measure players on equal playing fields, meaning they are all playing at the same time in their primes, and do our best to determine whether or not the skills these players have would match up training and playing together. Considering half of the third and fourth rounds were players from the recent decade and a half, I find it very interesting to hear that you think the few taken from the first fifty years of the league were reaches. Unless you consider some of the legends taken in the first two rounds are reaches, I see nothing but values considering most of the other older guys went pretty late.

[gabefergy]

That's a very different opinion. If you feel the fact that we are as we should be in having about as many players taken from the last 18-25 of the league than there are players from the first 43-50 years (talking about when players were in their primes), then you certainly differ from me in my way of thinking. Players are bigger and faster now because of improved training methods, scientific advances and the fact that they get paid enough to make basketball their full-time job and sole source of income, but it's unfair to just take that to mean they are better than the older guys. We have to try and measure players on equal playing fields, meaning they are all playing at the same time in their primes, and do our best to determine whether or not the skills these players have would match up training and playing together. Considering half of the third and fourth rounds were players from the recent decade and a half, I find it very interesting to hear that you think the few taken from the first fifty years of the league were reaches. Unless you consider some of the legends taken in the first two rounds are reaches, I see nothing but values considering most of the other older guys went pretty late.

I should re-phrase. As far as the first couple of round went, I think it was just about right. There might have been one or two guys taken before they should have but there are always differences of opinion. The vast majority of reaches IMO came for players that are not current players, but ended their careers in the past 10 years. I think that category went too early across the board. As for the "legends", guys who played 40-50 years ago I think for the most part they went about where they should and I feel similarly about current NBA players. In terms of comparing players from different eras, I think it's a very difficult task and everyone will have different opinions on it. The style of the game has changed so much and so have the rules in some cases, so comparing players to their peers is probably the best way to do it. However, that approach can be flawed as well for reasons that have been previously discussed. I think you are partial to older players which is your perogative. I felt like a certain point was reached where the concept of "value" had no bearing anymore, because it became too subjective.

Edited September 13, 2014 by gabefergy

[SecretAgentMan]

Damn. I wanted love.. Time for another reach.. YAYYYYYYYYYYYY

[SecretAgentMan]

Only thing I was missing was a sharpshooter. Price is that and was a good PG anyway, so I'll take it

[gabefergy]

Shapshooter

[SecretAgentMan]

Shapshooter

Are you saying he isn't?  Correct me if I'm wrong but a career average of .402 is pretty good right?

[gabefergy]

Are you saying he isn't?  Correct me if I'm wrong but a career average of .402 is pretty good right?

No, I'm saying you spelled sharpshooter wrong.

[SecretAgentMan]

No, I'm saying you spelled sharpshooter wrong.

Oh LOL....  What happens when you get 2 hours of sleeep... 

[beanfigger]

I should re-phrase. As far as the first couple of round went, I think it was just about right. There might have been one or two guys taken before they should have but there are always differences of opinion. The vast majority of reaches IMO came for players that are not current players, but ended their careers in the past 10 years. I think that category went too early across the board. As for the "legends", guys who played 40-50 years ago I think for the most part they went about where they should and I feel similarly about current NBA players. In terms of comparing players from different eras, I think it's a very difficult task and everyone will have different opinions on it. The style of the game has changed so much and so have the rules in some cases, so comparing players to their peers is probably the best way to do it. However, that approach can be flawed as well for reasons that have been previously discussed. I think you are partial to older players which is your perogative. I felt like a certain point was reached where the concept of "value" had no bearing anymore, because it became too subjective.

Thanks for the clarity. I totally agree that the players who retired earlier this century have been vastly overrated. I have been including them when discussing the "contemporary bias", but as far as players who are still playing, there were a few reaches in rounds three and four, but not too many. I am not necessarily partial to the older guys, but I do have to say their value has been way better due to the reaches on the late 90s/early 2000s crew. There are only so many current players that deserve selection, so the fact that they haven't been sitting around on the board means there is little value to be found there. Love is an exception, and that's what I was getting at originally.

Edited September 13, 2014 by beanfigger

[-Truth-]

And I remember Truth saying that ABA years are counted so I just picked a guy who is 9th on all time points scored.

 

I really liked the Stephen Curry pick too, I think he has the chance to go down as the greatest shooter in nba history.

 

That they do. And thank you. I'm right there with you. I'm not sure that I've ever seen a player who makes immediate transition threes seem like a sound strategy. It's crazy to think that he's shooting 44% from downtown for his career.

[-Truth-]

Wanted another big man/stretch 4. Love is arguably the best PF in the game right now. Don't love his defense, but his offense will be a spark off the bench. My PF depth is pretty strong with McHale, Jerry Lucas, and Love.

 

Great choice with Love. I think it's a tough call between who the best current PF is, but he's certainly up there. He was neck and neck for the lead when I was on the clock.

[-Truth-]

With all the young players that are being selected, Curry needs to be on somebody's team with those skills.

 

Thank you. And I agree there. I was hesitant at first with a scoring PG in Archibald on the roster, but I feel like having a pass-first PG as a starter helps balance it out. Either Dumars or Moncrief will be with Curry at all times lol

[MoveThoseChains]

Great choice with Love. I think it's a tough call between who the best current PF is, but he's certainly up there. He was neck and neck for the lead when I was on the clock.

 

I agree. I said "arguably" because I'm with you: it is a tough call between who the best current PF is. I'm not sure if he is the best, but he's definitely up there. With Aldridge and Griffin off the board, I think Love was the best PF available who is currently playing in the NBA. 

[beanfigger]

I agree. I said "arguably" because I'm with you: it is a tough call between who the best current PF is. I'm not sure if he is the best, but he's definitely up there. With Aldridge and Griffin off the board, I think Love was the best PF available who is currently playing in the NBA.

According to the advanced statistics that some were throwing around earlier about other players, Love has been the third best PLAYER in the league (behind James and Durant), let alone PF. I think he's the best PF right now, and I think that will be evident to everyone in the next couple seasons when he actually gets covered by national networks.

[gabefergy]

According to the advanced statistics that some were throwing around earlier about other players, Love has been the third best PLAYER in the league (behind James and Durant), let alone PF. I think he's the best PF right now, and I think that will be evident to everyone in the next couple seasons when he actually gets covered by national networks.

He was last year. He hasn't been that good throughout his career, although part of that is due to injury. Blake has been more consistent in his career, and Aldridge has gotten better pretty much every year he has been in the league which is impressive in its own right. I don't think there is much that separates those three overall. Just personal preference.

[beanfigger]

He was last year. He hasn't been that good throughout his career, although part of that is due to injury. Blake has been more consistent in his career, and Aldridge has gotten better pretty much every year he has been in the league which is impressive in its own right. I don't think there is much that separates those three overall. Just personal preference.

Agreed. Love is the best rebounder/shooter. Griffin is the best breaker, and becoming a solid low post guy. Aldridge is just all-around talent.

[-Truth-]

I agree. I said "arguably" because I'm with you: it is a tough call between who the best current PF is. I'm not sure if he is the best, but he's definitely up there. With Aldridge and Griffin off the board, I think Love was the best PF available who is currently playing in the NBA. 

 

That is my mistake. I accidentally read it as absolutely instead of arguably. My bad. Working Saturdays will do that to a man. Oh, there's no question that you could make a case for Love for being the best. While he lacks a bit defensively defense, he's easily one of the league's best rebounders and shooting big men. Not to mention that he was also a highly underrated distributor for his position this season. Those outlet passes were something to watch. And the latter part is very much correct in my eyes.