Draft Pick 2010: Hypothetical #1

Moderators: Inigo Montoya, FJS

erudite23
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,857
And1: 660
Joined: Jun 14, 2004

Re: Draft Pick 2010: Hypothetical #1 

Post#21 » by erudite23 » Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:49 pm

Batronuj wrote:
erudite23 wrote:All I know is that in the NBA, the team that trades down rarely ever wins. The two most recent examples are 1)the Trail Blazers getting cute and trading from #3 down to #6 because they supposedly were set at PG, ending up with a middling prospect on the wing out of the pick, along with two future selections that ended up being Joel Freeland and (iirc) Petteri Koponen, while missing out on possibly the two best PGs of this generation. Now, here they are 4 years later and the only real weakness on their roster is PG. And 2) the Clippers trading from 2 to 4 with the Bobcats in 04. Essentially giving Charlotte the chance to take the leftover big guy after Orlando picked and in turn being able to get Shaun Livingston, who was--whether you credit injuries or whatever--a collosal bust in the NBA. While Okafor might not be DWill or CP, he is an excellent defender and shotblocker who is a good team player and character guy, worthy of 10m+ a year, while Livingston couldn't even crack the starting lineup before his gruesome knee injury.

The team trading down almost never wins. You can't really get value by manuevering in the draft. Its not like the NFL where you can get multiple picks and recoup the value that way. In the NBA, 5 guys get 85% of your team's playing time. That puts the emphasis on quality and magnitude of a small group of players, rather than on having a large group of "good" ones.


There are obviously a lot of moving parts, but with the way this draft is initially shaping up, it looks like there is an excellent chance--if we end up with a top 3-5 pick--of us ending up on the clock with an elite PG prospect being far and away the best player available. If that happens, you just have to take him, imo, and then let the chips fall where they may.


Well. first of all let me say that was a very good post, and obviously you bring up a lot of good points.

But I still want to have some fun and play devil's advocate a little bit.

First of all, lets get things straight in that the Jazz gave the Blazers the #6 pick and the # 27 pick which ended up being Linas Klieza who they immediately traded for Jarret Jack. Just for logistical purposes.

Second, everybody knows, as was the Jazz plan that when taking an SF that year Danny Granger was the obvious pick (somehow he fell to #17 which is beyond me) but anyways, had Portland made the right call they could have ended up with a pretty good deal in getting Jack and Granger, both pretty good players. But that is neither here nor there.

My real point is, the two teams you brought up were the Blazers and the Clippers. It just so happens that both of these teams were essentially run by the two worst GM's in the NBA at the time in that idiot Elgin Baylor and the man who brought us the JailBlazers John Nash. Both incompitent losers who shouldn't have been making decisions with franchises at stake.

As long as the Jazz have KOC running the show, I feel confident that if we were to trade down it would be for better purpose.

Also there is the whole Sebastian Telfair incident that Portland thought they had something that they obviously didn't and that's why they didn't keep the pick but whatever, again, neither here nor there.

All I am saying is, you can't let the incompitence of Nash and Baylor throw dirt on the idea of making a trade with the pick.

But like it has been said, we are putting the cart before the horse, the chances of this pick being high enough to have to worry about Rubio or Wall is extremely slim, and honestly I'd be happy with whoever we pick up.


So....two dumb GMs did it, so that's what its a bad move? I get your points, and they are worthy of taking into account certainly, but we can't just throw that blanket over everything. Way more teams than just Portland ended up passing on Granger, so its not like they made a huge gaffe that is completely impossible to understand. And are we also to excuse Baylor's move by saying "well, if they had just taken Devin Harris than they would be much better off"....no, I don't think so.

Both Nash and Baylor have made very good moves at times. Obviously getting Elton Brand in return for the pick that netted Tyson Chandler was a huge coup. Is that a bad move just because Baylor made it?

The point is, in the NBA draft the cream generally rises to the top. Its extremely rare for great players to be selected outside of the top 3, 4 or 5 range. Not to say it doesn't happen, because the Jazz franchise is proof of that. Malone, Stockton, AK, Boozer, and Memo were all selected outside of the top 10. But it gets to be a crap shoot pretty damn quick once you are outside of the consensus elite prospects.

The Dirk for Tractor Traylor deal is an excellent example. It was before the wave of Europeans hit, and Dirk was an unkown, blazing a trail that no one had seen successfully blazed before. But there are some exceptions here. First of all, it wasn't moving down from the top 3 or 4 pick that I'm talking about. The consensus best players (with the exception of Paul Pierce, who had inexplicably fallen down the board) were already taken. Traylor was just a big guy with nice tools (or so the conventional wisdom says, its hard to credit in hindsight) that was a boom or bust type of guy. They didn't trade the opportunity to get Mike Bibby (who was considered an amazing PG prospect, even though his career didn't quite turn out that way) Vince Carter or Raef Lafrentz (who was actually a really good player before injuries and salary cap considerations got in the way). Also, if Dirk were to enter the draft today, with the success of other Europeans up to this point, he would easily be a top 5 pick, maybe even #1 overall in a lot of drafts.

The Rockets trade with Griffin is a better substantiation of the "trade down and get value" perspective, but it hinges on Rod Thorn's acumen as a GM as well as a bit of luck. Griffin was a very good prospect, but he was also certifiably and tragically mental. That entire 2001 draft was a really weird year. I think Thorn knew that whoever he was looking at with the # 7 pick would be a bit of a crapshoot, so he traded down and hoped to hit big on one of the 3 picks. Even so, would you argue that getting Richard Jefferson with the 7th pick overall is a good return? Barely. RJ has since been shown to be a bit of a selfish player who is not well rounded enough to be a legit star. He might have benefitted more from playing alongside J-Kidd than any other player in the history of the game. Even so, though, the other two players acquired with the extra picks were Jason Collins and Brandon Armstrong. So they could simply have taken RJ at #7 and gotten equal value.



Finally, if anyone thinks this is the cart before the horse, feel free to ignore it. The bottom line is that what happens with this pick is going to play a HUGE role--for better or worse--in the future of the Jazz franchise. This could be our Magic Johnson, Dominique Wilkins or Tim Duncan. Or it could just be another throw away late lottery pick that doesn't make a dent. But with the way its shaping up, it would be stupid of us not to give it its proper place and discuss it exhaustively. If you feel differently, no need to pooh pooh. You can always go elsewhere.
gonzo
Junior
Posts: 385
And1: 10
Joined: Oct 22, 2006

Re: Draft Pick 2010: Hypothetical #1 

Post#22 » by gonzo » Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:45 am

Different guys running the Knicks these days.
I doubt it's the holy grail of all draft picks.
I hope I'm wrong.
Racer X wrote:We are not out of this mother yet.
carrottop12
RealGM
Posts: 21,602
And1: 30
Joined: Oct 10, 2006
Location: why you take out my sig for?

Re: Draft Pick 2010: Hypothetical #1 

Post#23 » by carrottop12 » Thu Feb 19, 2009 4:52 am

As long as they have Krypto-nate, Eddy Curry, and Al Harrington on their roster, I'm confident they won't win many games.
erudite23
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,857
And1: 660
Joined: Jun 14, 2004

Re: Draft Pick 2010: Hypothetical #1 

Post#24 » by erudite23 » Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:06 pm

I wouldn't underestimate just how bad that team is. Think about it for a second:

Duhon
Nate Rob
Chandler
Harrington
Lee


...since when does a roster like that win any more than 33 games in a season? Right now I think they have played about up to their max potential. Now throw in just a little adversity, and the potential loss of both Lee and Robinson (their two best players right now), another year of age on Harrington's knees (their 3rd best player) and it could get ugly REALLY quickly, especially now with the addition of Hughes into that poisonous brew that they call "chemistry" on that team. Pretty sure it'll be top 10. Decent chance its top 6...and once you get in the top 6 or 7, anything can happen with the lotto balls.
User avatar
Concept Coop
Analyst
Posts: 3,040
And1: 608
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Re: Draft Pick 2010: Hypothetical #1 

Post#25 » by Concept Coop » Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:22 pm

erudite23 wrote:I wouldn't underestimate just how bad that team is. Think about it for a second:

Duhon
Nate Rob
Chandler
Harrington
Lee


...since when does a roster like that win any more than 33 games in a season? Right now I think they have played about up to their max potential. Now throw in just a little adversity, and the potential loss of both Lee and Robinson (their two best players right now), another year of age on Harrington's knees (their 3rd best player) and it could get ugly REALLY quickly, especially now with the addition of Hughes into that poisonous brew that they call "chemistry" on that team. Pretty sure it'll be top 10. Decent chance its top 6...and once you get in the top 6 or 7, anything can happen with the lotto balls.

As of today you would have the 9th or 10th pick in the draft. They are going to get better next year, they have to. They have tied their future to 2010. No big name FA is going to a New York squad with the cast they now. They have to at least be competing for the 8th spot in the East.

Best scenario is New York being about as bad as they are now. 6-10 is most likely. Not a franchise changing pick, but a nice piece. Hopefully a quality starter.
Real GM Bulls Board: Step 2 - Anger
User avatar
Knicksfan1
Veteran
Posts: 2,565
And1: 12
Joined: Dec 02, 2008

Re: Draft Pick 2010: Hypothetical #1 

Post#26 » by Knicksfan1 » Sun Feb 22, 2009 4:35 am

erudite23 wrote:Its getting to the point where we can start making specific inferences, speculations and observations about the direction the Jazz take with the NY pick in 2010.

So far, everything is playing out like an absolute charm for us. With NY having a good enough year this season to raise hopes, get a good flow going and erase any likelihood of a top 3 pick that would actually net them an impact player, while also divesting themselves of their best, most productive players as well as settting themselves up to lose David Lee and Nate Robinson (probably their two best guys atm).

If things continue on this trajectory, it would be very easy to see them fall into a horrible season next year, once Lee and Nate Rob leave. We could be looking at a top 5, maybe even top 3 pick next year.


So here's the question:

If the Jazz find themselves on the clock, staring at Ricky Rubio as the best player on their board, and without any big guy or even swingman that is of comparable quality (and assuming they can't pull a trade for equal value), do they take him?

We already are set for the foreseeable future at PG, obviously. But could a back court of Deron and Ricky succeed? Both are big, and Rubio will likely be able to guard most SGs in the league. Deron has the shot, while Ricky has the craftiness and ability to get to the hole. Would it work?

I know this, with the supreme emphasis that the Jazz coaching staff places on deflections, I can easily see them falling in love with him. The dude might be the best in the world at getting his hands on the ball defensively. He just has that 6th sense that enables him to do it even when you don't think its possible.

Its an unconventional approach, granted. But with the ever increasing importance of having a big time PG in the league, how can you argue with having two at the same time, especially when they could play together and potentially complement one another so well.

Of course, it would be better if we could get the next Bill Walton or Hakeem. But if he's undeniably the best player available, what do we do?
Wow the IQ of Jazz fans is much lower then Jerry Sloan
Roscoe Sheed wrote:Also, everybody complains about KG setting moving screens, but Duncan is just as bad
User avatar
DelaneyRudd
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 104,536
And1: 9,466
Joined: Nov 17, 2006
     

Re: Draft Pick 2010: Hypothetical #1 

Post#27 » by DelaneyRudd » Sun Feb 22, 2009 4:42 am

Na, you guys are gonna be fantastic next year. :-?
User avatar
jazzfan1971
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 39,327
And1: 8,581
Joined: Jul 16, 2001
Location: Salt Lake City
 

Re: Draft Pick 2010: Hypothetical #1 

Post#28 » by jazzfan1971 » Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:27 am

Hey, they are much better this year than I thought they'd be. Who knows how well D'antoni can get them playing next year? Personally I didn't see them winning over 25 games this year, they'll probably get that in February.

They've been very impressive considering their roster.
"Thibs called back and wanted more picks," said Jorge Sedano. "And Pat Riley, literally, I was told, called him a mother-bleeper and hung up the phone."

Return to Utah Jazz