RealGM

Briefly: there's little reward in identifying a great talent if he doesn't reach his potential while playing for your team.

When comparing guys in this draft I keep hearing names like: Chauncey Billups (Knight) and Ben Wallace (Biyombo). And it struck me that neither of those guys actually reached their potential for the team that drafted/originally signed them. It makes me nervous about drafting a guy that's TOO far away. Not because the Jazz necessarily need him to contribute right away, but because if he blooms too late you're not going to either A) enjoy the rewards of drafting well and developing him; B) get good value in a trade for him.

Do you think Rick Pitino, who drafted Chauncey Billups 3rd overall for Boston (then traded him partway through his rookie season), feels better or worse about his pick, knowing that Billups later became a 5-time All-Star and was the 2004 Finals MVP?

I think the guys you reference are the exception rather than the rule. Celtic fans (particularly Bill Simmons who references it from time to time) still don't understand Pitino's' decision to trade Chauncey that quickly. It really was a head scratcher. He was putting up solid #s for a rookie and the team was trying to rebuild anyway. Maybe he did it out of sheer grief and losing the chance to draft Duncan. The trade completely destroyed Billups' confidence (15.4 PER pre-trade, 11.1 after) and he took a long time to recover. Look at the effect it had on his numbers: http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... uch01.html

I don't think Chauncey was anything close to a project. He was on a good trajectory and his HC seriously derailed his career.


Wallace was just an undrafted guy trying to make it in the league. No one ever invested anything in him. He was always just gravy.


That said....a guy like, say, Steve Nash, who was drafted by Phoenix and didn't make an impact until, really, his 5th year, or a guy like Gerald Wallace--given up on by Sac and taken to Charlotte in the expansion draft--or Hedo--also drafted by Sacramento, moved to SA and then Orlando, where he played for 3 years before mysteriously making a jump in production halfway through his career--or Joe Johnson--drafted by Boston, traded to Phoenix where he took 2 and a half years to blossom and then when he finally started to pay off, losing him to FA--all those guys would qualify. All were high upside guys who weren't expected to contribute right away. All were traded before they became who they were.....BUT, almost all were drafted by teams in disarray with poor management who were under pressure to make changes. Those types of organizations always look for scape goats, and Johnson, in particular, became that.

The Jazz will give any guy they take every chance to prove himself, one way or the other. So that is some small comfort. But I guess the point still remains. A long term guy is just as likely to make it with some other team as he is to make it with yours. Great point.

Thanks for the additional examples. In the back of my head I knew there were more out there and hoped someone would chime in.

I think e23 makes a good point though about the jazz being extremely willing to give their own guys every chance they can to prove themselves.

Look no further than fesenko, price, and cj as guys the jazz have invested time in when they easily could have cut ties and tried something different. The jazz are generally extremely patient, so if a player like biyombo or valanciunas or knight were to find themselves on the jazz, I have no doubt the jazz would do everything in their power to let the, develop.

The jazz have made their mistakes in letting guys go too early, but it's always been because of financial restraints and not for lack of trying. Mo Williams and Matthews come to mind, but the guys the jazz have given up on almost never find a spot anywhere else.

Looking back, the jazz essentially cut ties with pavlovic, humphries, Snyder, and almond, and of that group only humphries would you even have a remote second thought about, and even then ever since dumping him, the jazz have never had a pf he would play in front of on the team.

Basically, I think I am saying that despite whiffing on so e draft picks, the jazz are very good with evaluating the talent on their team.

If I'm the GM of the Jazz I'mooking for humble guys who will be willing to stick around in Utah. Players that are smart, want to win and put in the work needed to gt there. I think Knight fits that mold. So would Irving, probably even Kanter (europeans don't generally seem to share the anti-utah bias). Williams doesn't seem like a guy that would. I mean I would take him if he was available...I'm just saying that being a "project" isn't the best i.dicator of whether a player will stay or go. If whoever we draft takes a few years to get there, he'll be blooming at the same time as Hayward and Favors, anyway.