2024 Draft Class Strength Predictions

[FarBeyondDriven]

Here's the final tally. If I've mischaracterized your stance (had to guess based on past comments since some refused to partake and I want as an exhaustive list as possible) please let me know so I can correct it. Otherwise I'll assume you're good and attempts to distance yourself later won't fly since I know you'll see this Thanks to those that participated

Tier 1 (Elite/GOAT)


Tier 2 (Excellent)



Tier 3 (Very Good)

Sakkreth

Tier 4 (Good)

FarBeyondDriven
SeattleJazzFan
PlatinumState
bucknut

*Tier 4.5

NyBlueMeadow based on - "The more I watch film on the prospects, the more the 2024 draft is looking above average to good..."
QingJames
Threezus

Tier 5 (Average)

King Ken based on - "Overall, this is a solid draft class"
BigGargamel


*Tier 5.5

MagicMatic

Tier 5.75

EMG518

Tier 6 (Bad)

RollingWave
Catchall
Blaze the Nugz
Empire Falls

*Tier 6.5

babyjax13

Tier 7 (Very Bad)

Notanoob
NO-KG-AI
JustBuzzin
JMAC3
Dat2U
Colbini

*Tier 7.5

red_power

Tier 8 (Among the Worst Ever)

HadAnEffectHere - "This is the worst class I've ever seen."
Clyde21
shakes0
NYPiston
BigJ
BenJammin
CptCrunch - "this draft looks to suck major ass"
bigboi - "horrible draft"
johsuacf
DOT

[babyjax13]

I was 6.5, between bad and very bad. It will be interesting to see where this one ends up, hopefully there are some random players who really pop in the league.

Don't think it is useful to put people up here who have not responded with their predictions, it is easy enough to look back at what people thought.

[EMG518]

I don't remember saying very bad, feels strong, could I be at like 5.75, closer to bad than average.

[FarBeyondDriven]

I was 6.5, between bad and very bad. It will be interesting to see where this one ends up, hopefully there are some random players who really pop in the league.

Don't think it is useful to put people up here who have not responded with their predictions, it is easy enough to look back at what people thought.

I spend the time going through comments so I'm pretty sure they're reasonable and accurate. And of course they can let me know like you have if they feel misrepresented

[FarBeyondDriven]

I don't remember saying very bad, feels strong, could I be at like 5.75, closer to bad than average.

"Just take him #1, this draft is terrible."

I mean, that does sound like Very Bad to me but if "terrible" means nearly average to you then I'll of course change it. That's why I asked

[Sakkreth]

Tier 3, very good. While it's weak at the very top, there will be multiple hits in various spots in the first round.

[The-Power]

Don't think it is useful to put people up here who have not responded with their predictions, it is easy enough to look back at what people thought.

I mean, this user went into half a dozen threads in their quest to put down names to next to tiers (at least this time without a random list of specific drafts to define them) for the sole purpose of later dunking on people if they are wrong in their prediction (of course we will likely never hear from them again if they are wrong).

The whole exercise adds nothing of value. This user has come into the draft board fairly recently – without any kind of track record on draft predictions – mainly to tell the world that people on here, as well as NBA executives, are constantly wrong. This is just the next iteration of that exercise.

Someone truly interested in the opinions of others – you know, to learn from them and understand where they differ – would not just want to put down names on a list but ask for arguments, justifications and criteria. The latter is still sorely lacking for what it's worth.

If, for instance, a couple players drafted outside the lottery become stars that clearly elevates the draft quality in hindsight but that in and of itself would not make it a strong draft class coming into the NBA. People who believe that this is a good draft class would not be proven right if players they thought would not amount to much end up being much better than expected. Also, how do we define and measure the quality of the draft class – by the amount of stars it produces, by the share of top picks that turn out to be franchise cornerstones, by the number of quality players it has produced ten years in, by the share of players that make it to their second contract, by the number of players that get a max extension, etc.? Tons of options here.

Most people, myself included, focused on the lack of high-end talent at the top of the draft. Would I be surprised if this draft produces a solid number of quality players? No. Would I be surprised if this draft turned out to have several franchise cornerstones and stars picked at the top of the draft? Yeah. I don't think it's impossible but pretty unlikely (I can acknowledge the unpredictability of the draft and will therefore eschew making grand declarations). Anyway, not sure who ‘red_power’ is (diligent work) but I remember calling the draft weak (particularly at the top) on several occasions. Do with that what you will.

[FarBeyondDriven]

Don't think it is useful to put people up here who have not responded with their predictions, it is easy enough to look back at what people thought.

I mean, this user went into half a dozen threads in their quest to put down names to next to tiers (at least this time without a random list of specific drafts to define them) for the sole purpose of later dunking on people if they are wrong in their prediction (of course we will likely never hear from them again if they are wrong).

The whole exercise adds nothing of value. This user has come into the draft board fairly recently – without any kind of track record on draft predictions – mainly to tell the world that people on here, as well as NBA executives, are constantly wrong. This is just the next iteration of that exercise.

Someone truly interested in the opinions of others – you know, to learn from them and understand where they differ – would not just want to put down names on a list but ask for arguments, justifications and criteria. The latter is still sorely lacking for what it's worth.

If, for instance, a couple players drafted outside the lottery become stars that clearly elevates the draft quality in hindsight but that in and of itself would not make it a strong draft class coming into the NBA. People who believe that this is a good draft class would not be proven right if players they thought would not amount to much end up being much better than expected. Also, how do we define and measure the quality of the draft class – by the amount of stars it produces, by the share of top picks that turn out to be franchise cornerstones, by the number of quality players it has produced ten years in, by the share of players that make it to their second contract, by the number of players that get a max extension, etc.? Tons of options here.

Most people, myself included, focused on the lack of high-end talent at the top of the draft. Would I be surprised if this draft produces a solid number of quality players? No. Would I be surprised if this draft turned out to have several franchise cornerstones and stars picked at the top of the draft? Yeah. I don't think it's impossible but pretty unlikely (I can acknowledge the unpredictability of the draft and will therefore eschew making grand declarations). Anyway, not sure who ‘red_power’ is (diligent work) but I remember calling the draft weak (particularly at the top) on several occasions. Do with that what you will.

The whole point of doing this is to establish a track record for myself genius. Try to keep up. And for all of you as well. Because it's fun! We're always comparing D sizes in here so I'm not sure why a particular group (the usuals) is triggered by this exercise while everyone else seems to be playing along just fine. I have my suspicions about who are the posters that are completely full of it but I want confirmation. And ducking this exercise won't absolve you btw. We know where you stand.

Remember, I'm putting my opinions on record just like everyone else who has participated. If this is a horrible draft class like my opps believe then I'm the one looking like an idiot for defending it these past several months. Get it? At least I and the couple dozen other posters have the courage to put their takes to the test unlike you and your ilk.

jfc do you know every poster on here? Are you insinuating it's made up? Or triggered because it's a similar name? Get a grip

it's not lost on me that the worst posters on here with the worst takes refuse to participate in this

[FarBeyondDriven]

Tier 3, very good. While it's weak at the very top, there will be multiple hits in various spots in the first round.

thanks. I believe that makes you the most optimistic of us all!

[The-Power]

The whole point of doing this is to establish a track record for myself genius. Try to keep up.

You can establish a track record by just posting your opinions and big boards. Try to think.

We're always comparing D sizes in here

You and some others are, yes. That's part of the problem of this board and has been for a while. I personally have no interest in that.

And ducking this exercise won't absolve you btw. We know where you stand.

Ehm, okay. So what? You can read through my opinions any time you want. I am not hiding them, and I have no problems admitting when I'm wrong which happens all the time. I know this might be hard for you to grasp, though.

I have no interest in this ‘exercise’ of yours because it's just another part of your agenda that has lowered the quality of this board. You want to talk about the strength of this draft? Feel free. In fact, we have done this before and you have received plenty of feedback (much of which has seriously triggered you for whatever reason, which is why you lash out even more now). You can even ask people where they stand and if you genuinely cared about what they think, you would even ask for clarifications and try to understand where they are coming from. But you don't care for any of that. Instead, it's just silly antics.

At least I and the couple dozen other posters have the courage to put their takes to the test unlike you and your ilk.

I'm not sure who is part of my ‘ilk’ but my takes are out there for all to see and have been for years. I don't have to hide behind new accounts, or edit my posts after the fact, or shower myself with praise when I happened to be right only to be silent when I was wrong. It's truly bizarre that you – with zero track record on here – feel justified in going after people who have put out their opinions for years for allegedly not having ‘the courage to put their takes to the test’. That's some incredibly warped sense of reality right there.

Your whole attitude – needing to put people in some neat and overly simplistic boxes you created in hopes that you can later dunk on them (or never speak of it again if you're wrong) – is the problem. You're not interested in discussing and learning, you're interested in ‘winning’ arguments and feeling superior. You can't see that this is not only pointless (who really cares) but actively hurts the quality of discussion. Perhaps you eventually age out of this attitude.

Final remark: It is also not lost on me that you have made no effort to address the substantive points and genuine questions in my post. That's because, once again, you're not interested in having a conversation. As currently set up, this thread is going to be toxic far into the future and it's beyond obvious. Do you care, though? Of course not, because you'll make sure to be the one raising the level of toxicity.

[FarBeyondDriven]

The whole point of doing this is to establish a track record for myself genius. Try to keep up.

You can establish a track record by just posting your opinions and big boards. Try to think.

We're always comparing D sizes in here

You and some others are, yes. That's part of the problem of this board and has been for a while. I personally have no interest in that.

And ducking this exercise won't absolve you btw. We know where you stand.

Ehm, okay. So what? You can read through my opinions any time you want. I am not hiding them, and I have no problems admitting when I'm wrong which happens all the time. I know this might be hard for you to grasp, though.

I have no interest in this ‘exercise’ of yours because it's just another part of your agenda that has lowered the quality of this board. You want to talk about the strength of this draft? Feel free. In fact, we have done this before and you have received plenty of feedback (much of which has seriously triggered you for whatever reason, which is why you lash out even more now). You can even ask people where they stand and if you genuinely cared about what they think, you would even ask for clarifications and try to understand where they are coming from. But you don't care for any of that. Instead, it's just silly antics.

At least I and the couple dozen other posters have the courage to put their takes to the test unlike you and your ilk.

I'm not sure who is part of my ‘ilk’ but my takes are out there for all to see and have been for years. I don't have to hide behind new accounts, or edit my posts after the fact, or shower myself with praise when I happened to be right only to be silent when I was wrong. It's truly bizarre that you – with zero track record on here – feel justified in going after people who have put out their opinions for years for allegedly not having ‘the courage to put their takes to the test’. That's some incredibly warped sense of reality right there.

Your whole attitude – needing to put people in some neat and overly simplistic boxes you created in hopes that you can later dunk on them (or never speak of it again if you're wrong) – is the problem. You're not interested in discussing and learning, you're interested in ‘winning’ arguments and feeling superior. You can't see that this is not only pointless (who really cares) but actively hurts the quality of discussion. Perhaps you eventually age out of this attitude.

Final remark: It is also not lost on me that you have made no effort to address the substantive points and genuine questions in my post. That's because, once again, you're not interested in having a conversation. As currently set up, this thread is going to be toxic far into the future and it's beyond obvious. Do you care, though? Of course not, because you'll make sure to be the one raising the level of toxicity.

stop, you're killing me

"For someone so confident in their assessment from the start..."

this is you, bringing combativeness and toxicity to the discussion. Don't play dumb and innocent. You thought you were being slick reposting my Big Board (months ago when movement is expected) thinking you were going to get a gotcha moment in the future. I don't know who you think you're fooling (actually I think there's a few of you tbh) but it isn't me.

the point of this is to put it all in one location so people don't have to look through various topics and comments. How is this not obvious to you? This way, when we look back in a few years we have receipts. Don't be a joy kill. Just pick a tier or don't. You're boring me

[EMG518]

I don't remember saying very bad, feels strong, could I be at like 5.75, closer to bad than average.

"Just take him #1, this draft is terrible."

I mean, that does sound like Very Bad to me but if "terrible" means nearly average to you then I'll of course change it. That's why I asked

"Closer to bad than it is average" that's where I'm at right now. I don't want to say bad but much closer to bad than it is closer to avg