2025 Draft Thread - Part 2

[Dat2U]

...I brought up potential stars drafted between 4-9....

So you did. While leaving out the colossal number of busts (or mediocrities) drafted between 4-9 & also leaving out the actual stars drafted far later in the draft.

Let me choose a random draft, say 2008: you are so right that we find Derrick Rose & Russell Westbrook & Kevin Love right at the top. Absolutely great players every one of them! Wow!

But you want to leave out the fact that we also find Michael Beasley, OJ Mayo, & Joe Alexander right up there w/ Rose, Westbrook & Love. & you'd like to think that those 3 guys can be ignored. That they aren't evidence of anything.

Oh, & you'd also like to ignore the fact that Serge Ibaka went at 24 that year. That Ryan Anderson went at 21. That Nic Batum went at 25. That George Hill went at 26. That DeAndre Jordan went at 35. & that Goran Dragic went at 45.

If you want dismiss those guys by dubbing them mere "role players" I can't stop you. But it won't get you an inch in understanding actual reality.

Any more than leaving out Mario Chalmers & Luc Mbah a Moute, who combined to play 22 years in the league.

Repetition doesn't make things true.

I've never argued that there aren't busts at the top the draft. Of course there are, every single year. Part of my process is trying to figure out who is going to underperform vs their draft stock. I've had some great takes and some really bad ones. There's a level of educated guessing involved that will always lead to some incorrect decisions.

However I don't think GMs go into a draft hoping to get a Mbah a Moute level role player for the next decade. In fact most of these guys drafted after the lottery will likely jump teams a few times (or even be dumped) as teams look for something better and eventually younger and cheaper. Specifically, paying 2nd round picks once they hit free agency in alot of cases has not worked out. So you draft a decent guy late, he plays well and your forced to make a financial decision on him sooner than later.

IMO, hitting on late 1sts or 2nd round picks has more intrinsic value when your a playoff team and need that additional role player in a plug & play role. When your Wizards of current or Philly back in the 'trust the process' days, late picks or UFA finds like Robert Covington or Justin Champagnie tend to get overlooked and moved out of the way for the more prestigious prospects regardless of performance.

[doclinkin]

Repetition doesn't make things true.

Ha!

Irony.

(Made triply so by the fact that I’m the one quoting you on it. )

No response on the dwindling return of the 25th best pick at any draft position. Or never mind because you’re just trolling.

[DCZards]

So you did. While leaving out the colossal number of busts (or mediocrities) drafted between 4-9 & also leaving out the actual stars drafted far later in the draft.

Let me choose a random draft, say 2008: you are so right that we find Derrick Rose & Russell Westbrook & Kevin Love right at the top. Absolutely great players every one of them! Wow!

But you want to leave out the fact that we also find Michael Beasley, OJ Mayo, & Joe Alexander right up there w/ Rose, Westbrook & Love. & you'd like to think that those 3 guys can be ignored. That they aren't evidence of anything.

Oh, & you'd also like to ignore the fact that Serge Ibaka went at 24 that year. That Ryan Anderson went at 21. That Nic Batum went at 25. That George Hill went at 26. That DeAndre Jordan went at 35. & that Goran Dragic went at 45.

If you want dismiss those guys by dubbing them mere "role players" I can't stop you. But it won't get you an inch in understanding actual reality.

Any more than leaving out Mario Chalmers & Luc Mbah a Moute, who combined to play 22 years in the league.

Repetition doesn't make things true.

I don't think that anyone is saying that good players can’t be found throughout the draft. It’s just that the best players are typically found at or near the top of the draft. There’s no way around that. Westbrook and Rose were both league MVPs. While the guys you cited from that 2008 draft were never even the first or second best players on their teams.

You failed to mention Brook Lopez and Eric Gordon who were in the top ten of that 2008 draft and have had long and productive careers.

[AFM]

I can help all you guys out. The best player in this draft will probably be drafted around 9 or 10.

(Not gonna say who it is, but I will say that he turns the low post to a scary scene and has pockets fatter than Dairy Queen).

[payitforward]

Doc -- I assume you know this paper: https://daveberri.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/8/61387427/2011berribrookfennjpa.pdf

[doclinkin]

Doc -- I assume you know this paper: https://daveberri.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/8/61387427/2011berribrookfennjpa.pdf

Oh this thing again. Here was my quibble with it at the time. Berri only studied the first 5 years of a player's performance. Not peak performance, or career performance, or performance at player prime (~26 years).

NBA execs draft not for instant production on a rookie contract, they draft for upside. Ideally they keep a high performing player their entire career. If you study only a player's rookie contract then you will find your study is biased towards upperclassmen who have spent their developmental years at college but were not quite talented enough to jump to the NBA after their rookie season.

So yes, in the narrow slice of time of a player's rookie deal you will surely get better production out of juniors and seniors who are good enough to be drafted. They were not talented enough to jump early, but did show sufficient production to be on team's radar. Box score heroes. However you will miss out on the hypertalents. If you look at the first few years of young players like Kobe, or say Deni Avdija, you can expect them to underwhelm early on. They are spending their freshman years getting their ass handed to them by professional players in their 30's.

Obviously among the best of the best are those who were good enough to dominate as soon as they jumped to the league. Shaq, LeBron, etc. Those players will go #1 overall. They will perform well early and maintain that production or even get better. But you will miss out on players whose prime is higher than other players who produced the instant they hit the league but never progressed much beyond that.

Malcolm Brogdon won Rookie of the Year as a 24 year old. He was drafted with the 36th pick. Would you rather have Malcolm Brogdon on your team or Jaylen Brown (same year 3rd pick, 20yrs old).

If you just look at their rookie contract or 1st 5 years in the league you would say Brogdon:

https://stathead.com/tiny/ZscWF

But you would have missed out on an All-NBA player, Allstar, and Finals MVP. In favor of a one-time Rookie of the Year, one time 6th man. Still a nice player, but you also would have lost 140 games to injury relying on the older Brogdon.

Career win shares may be a better measure, even if it is biased towards winning teams. Career Wins Produced would be a fine metric too (even WP48 though that may be biased for 6th man types like Lou Williams or Ginobili) but only if you are looking at the totality of a player's career, not their rookie contract.

Another quibble with Berri et al. I'd like to see a Usage% correction to some of these efficiency stats. Your best players are high usage high efficiency standouts like Kevin Durant. Occasionally a guy like Otto Porter will look like an efficiency god for a couple years because he only shot good shots, but was not bending defenses since he was not aggressive in hunting his shot. Leave the grunt work to other players while the role player sparkles in the box score. I think a team could build a really solid regular season team by building with these sort of players. Trade downs for underdogs, overlooked box score heroes. It doesn't strictly seem to translate to championships.

For now though we are seeing teams win with guys who grew into their potential (Giannis, Kawhi, Jokic) or lottery picks (Curry +KD +Klay) (Brown + Tatum) or #1 overall phenoms (LeBJ or Duncan). And as far as career wins are concerned, those players tend to be found at the top of the draft. They are worth every penny of the contracts they earn AFTER they are off the rookie scale.

[payitforward]

From a different thread:

...[*]Dallas: ...My guess is that they trade a center (Gafford or Lively) for a good wing....

nate -- would you be interested in trading for Lively? Kid just turned 21....

Would they be interested in Middleton, & could such a deal be made to work?

[nate33]

From a different thread:

...[*]Dallas: ...My guess is that they trade a center (Gafford or Lively) for a good wing....

nate -- would you be interested in trading for Lively? Kid just turned 21....

Would they be interested in Middleton, & could such a deal be made to work?

No way Dallas does that. To get Lively, it would have to be something like Lively for Bilal. I don't think I would do that.

I would trade Sarr for Lively, but I doubt Dallas bites.

[payitforward]

...I brought up potential stars drafted between 4-9....

So you did. While leaving out the colossal number of busts (or mediocrities) drafted between 4-9 & also leaving out the actual stars drafted far later in the draft.

Let me choose a random draft, say 2008: you are so right that we find Derrick Rose & Russell Westbrook & Kevin Love right at the top. Absolutely great players every one of them! Wow!

But you want to leave out the fact that we also find Michael Beasley, OJ Mayo, & Joe Alexander right up there w/ Rose, Westbrook & Love. & you'd like to think that those 3 guys can be ignored. That they aren't evidence of anything.

Oh, & you'd also like to ignore the fact that Serge Ibaka went at 24 that year. That Ryan Anderson went at 21. That Nic Batum went at 25. That George Hill went at 26. That DeAndre Jordan went at 35. & that Goran Dragic went at 45.

If you want dismiss those guys by dubbing them mere "role players" I can't stop you. But it won't get you an inch in understanding actual reality.

Any more than leaving out Mario Chalmers & Luc Mbah a Moute, who combined to play 22 years in the league.

Repetition doesn't make things true.

I've never argued that there aren't busts at the top the draft. Of course there are, every single year. Part of my process is trying to figure out who is going to underperform vs their draft stock. I've had some great takes and some really bad ones. There's a level of educated guessing involved that will always lead to some incorrect decisions.

However I don't think GMs go into a draft hoping to get a Mbah a Moute level role player for the next decade. In fact most of these guys drafted after the lottery will likely jump teams a few times (or even be dumped) as teams look for something better and eventually younger and cheaper. Specifically, paying 2nd round picks once they hit free agency in alot of cases has not worked out. So you draft a decent guy late, he plays well and your forced to make a financial decision on him sooner than later.

IMO, hitting on late 1sts or 2nd round picks has more intrinsic value when your a playoff team and need that additional role player in a plug & play role. When your Wizards of current or Philly back in the 'trust the process' days, late picks or UFA finds like Robert Covington or Justin Champagnie tend to get overlooked and moved out of the way for the more prestigious prospects regardless of performance.

Good thinking, thanks!

In the end, the key point is that the draft is an environment of extremely high uncertainty. In situations of that kind, one does the best one can. Sometimes, you're smart or lucky or (more realistically) both, & you get Haliburton at 12 or Kawhi at 15 or Jimmy Butler at 30. Sometimes you're dumb or unlucky & get... well... we can all make the list.

No method is certain, everyone makes mistakes, & we all look better in the mirror than the other guy.

[doclinkin]

Without going into a full rundown of teams, you can get a sense of the depth of the picks by looking at say the 25th best player picked at any given pick position.

Playing with this again. 25 players may be too deep. It occurred to me it might be more clear if we looked at the 10th best player at any given draft pick. Also, taking a look at how deep the high end is, picking an arbitrary number of 100 win shares which tends to indicate a Hall of Fame player. (Melo was the only one that hit this threshold who had not yet made it, until he was elected last month).

10th best player at draft position by Career Win Score. (And all players with Win Score 100 or higher at that draft position).

Tenth best #1 overall pick.
1. Walt Bellamy 130.0 -- 16 players with career Win Shares of 100 or higher.
(Allen Iverson just missing the cut at 99.0)

Tenth best players of the top 5 draft slots.
2. Tyson Chandler 102.1 -- 10 players with WS 100+ (Alonzo Mourning missing the cut at 89.7)
3. Paul Arizin 108.8 -- 11 players WS 100+ (Grant Hill misses with 99.9)
4. Bob Cousy 91.1 -- 8 players WS 100+ (Jamison and Glen Rice fall short at ~ 88)
5. Sidney Moncrief 90.3 -- 8 players WS 100+ (Kevin Love outside at 94.9)

Top 10 slots, 10th best players.
6. Fred Brown 63.2 -- 3 players WS 100+ (Bird, Dantley, Dame Lillard)
7. Mike Gminski 55.9 -- (only Stef Curry)
8. George Yardley 58.5 -- 4 players WS 100+ (Robert Parish, Sikma, Schrempf, Andre Miller)
9. Dale Ellis 84.7 -- 6 players WS 100+ (Dirk, Havlicek, Matrix, DeRozan, Otis Thorpe, Iggy)
10. Willis Reed 74.9 -- 4 players WS 100+ (Pierce, Ho Grant, Jason Terry, Eddie Jones)

The next 5. Top half of the first round.
11. JJ Redick 63.7 -- (Reggie Miller WS 174.4)
12. Jim Paxson 53.7 -- ( Dr. J. WS 106.2)
13. Danny Schayes 48.8 -- 2 players (Karl Malone. Kobe)
14. K.C. Jones 38.6 -- 3 players (Drexler, 2 guys who played in the 60's)
15. Dell Curry 41.5 -- 3 players (Nash, Giannis, Kawhi)

2nd half of the 1st round, 10th best at each.
16. Brevin Knight 32.6 -- (only John Stockton)
17. Rasho Nesterović 39.9 -- (none)
18. Eric Bledsoe 46.1 -- (none)
19. Jamaal Magloire 27.7 -- (none)
20. Delon Wright 28.9 -- (only Larry Nance)
21. Morris Peterson 35.7 -- (none)
22. Chris Mills 37.7 -- (none)
23. Bobby Jackson 31.4 -- (only Alex English)
24. Arvydas Sabonis 47.3 -- (Kyle Lowry, Terry Porter)
25. Bob Weiss 31.2 -- (None)
26. Payton Pritchard 20.9 -- (none, Vlade Divac misses the cut at 96.4)
27. Kendrick Perkins 27.9 -- (only Rudy Gobert)
28. Ian Mahinmi 26.1 -- (only Tony Parker)
29. Nazr Mohammed 34.3 -- (none)
30. Ollie Johnson 5.0 -- (only Jimmy Butler)

Pretty steady decline in depth when you look at the top 10 players at any draft slot. The career numbers of the 10th pick is generally worse than the players above them. 18 & 24 are a blip, deeper in playably good guys. But the HOF players follow the trend. Yes a few slip through the cracks but the tiers seem to hold solid:

#1 overall is deep in hall of famers.
Top 5 regularly pumps out more than a handful of career winners.
Top 10 has a few at each draft slot.
The rest of the top half of the first round may produce one or two at each spot over time.
The 2nd half of the first round tails off with sporadic top end players.

[doclinkin]

LOL this may only be meaningful to me, but it feels like I conclusively demonstrated the deal.

Okay I'll shut up now. Look for rumors of workouts and college kids training for the draft.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

RIght. Plus there is also the added issue of perceived value. 18 is a mid 1st round pick. Whereas 26 & 27 are late 1sts. In fact they are so late in the round they in essence are the equivalent of 2nd round picks. Is there really any difference between picking 26 & 27 and picking 32 & 33? The value of a mid 1st round pick is much higher and takes a lot more to obtain than 2nd rounders which are tossed around left and right as trade fillers or sold for cash.

2nd round picks are a dime a dozen, so why on earth would you trade a mid 1st round pick, which last season we parted with Deni Avdija to obtain a mid 1st round pick, so why would you trade a mid 1st for essentially 2 2nd round picks that could be easily acquired for cash considerations or some kind of future protected 2nds that could eventually become a ham sandwich with a side of crab chips.

Late firsts have guaranteed contracts that keep them on rosters. They're generally no better than some of the best second rounders.

In 2021, the Wizards missed by drafting Isaiah Todd at #31, the first round two pick.

However, better later picks: Herbert Jones #35, Miles McBride #36, JT Thor #37, Ayo Dosunmu #38, Neemis Queta #39, Jared Butler #40, Aaron Wiggins #55, and JUSTIN CHAMPAGNIE undrafted were each arguably as good as late firsts.

Not "as good," better -- every one of the guys you mention except Thor has been substantially better than the guys taken at 2, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28 & 29.

But, it doesn't matter. People *know* that higher picks are "better," because... you know... they're higher. & "higher" is "better." It's "obvious."

That people don't let facts get in the way of such opinions is no surprise either. A year or so ago, one of the top posters here provided what he took to be incontrovertible evidence that Kyle Kuzma was @ the 65th best player among the @500 guys who get minutes in the league each year.

There's just nothing to be done about it. In fact, for quite a while, I gave up trying to make the point about the draft -- just too much dust gets kicked up. But, this is a particularly important draft, so I tried again -- & got the same responses as I usually do.

Does it matter? Nah, of course not! We're just yacking here! & there are plenty of issues where I agree with the very same posters who are wrong per the above stuff.

In this draft, nobody is talking about Eric Dixon. He's going to be a "suprise" on an NBA roster next season.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

New Mock draft has Wizards taking Maluach at 5 & Traore at 18...

Watch on YouTube

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Late firsts have guaranteed contracts that keep them on rosters. They're generally no better than some of the best second rounders.

In 2021, the Wizards missed by drafting Isaiah Todd at #31, the first round two pick.

However, better later picks: Herbert Jones #35, Miles McBride #36, JT Thor #37, Ayo Dosunmu #38, Neemis Queta #39, Jared Butler #40, Aaron Wiggins #55, and JUSTIN CHAMPAGNIE undrafted were each arguably as good as late firsts.

Not "as good," better -- every one of the guys you mention except Thor has been substantially better than the guys taken at 2, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28 & 29.

But, it doesn't matter. People *know* that higher picks are "better," because... you know... they're higher. & "higher" is "better." It's "obvious."

That people don't let facts get in the way of such opinions is no surprise either. A year or so ago, one of the top posters here provided what he took to be incontrovertible evidence that Kyle Kuzma was @ the 65th best player among the @500 guys who get minutes in the league each year.

There's just nothing to be done about it. In fact, for quite a while, I gave up trying to make the point about the draft -- just too much dust gets kicked up. But, this is a particularly important draft, so I tried again -- & got the same responses as I usually do.

Does it matter? Nah, of course not! We're just yacking here! & there are plenty of issues where I agree with the very same posters who are wrong per the above stuff.

In this draft, nobody is talking about Eric Dixon. He's going to be a "suprise" on an NBA roster next season.

Well of all the drafts to trade back in, this is probably one of the worst. This is not an especially deep draft, as this is the 1st draft that is really being affected by NIL. Almost anyone with remaining eligibility that's not guaranteed of going in the 1st round will be going back to school. Guys like Isaiah Evans, Kanon Catchings, JT Toppin, Cedric Coward, Ian Jackson, Caleb Love, Boogie Fland, Tahaad Pettiford, Miles Byrd, Alex Condon, Tyrese Proctor, JoJo Tugler are just some of the many potential 2nd round picks that are either already returning to school or likely returning. The player pool from around pick 20 on is essentially being watered down because of players that will make more to stay in school and potentially improve their draft positioning next year are pulling out of the draft. So a player staying in the draft and slotted in the area of 26-28 would probably be slotted more like 36-38 if everyone that could be in the draft was staying in.

So all these players you keep listing and stats about what quality of players were taken where in the draft is moot because it doesn't apply to this draft, because all of those previous drafts you are citing did not have this element of NIL siphoning the quality level of the later picks in the draft.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

...I brought up potential stars drafted between 4-9....

So you did. While leaving out the colossal number of busts (or mediocrities) drafted between 4-9 & also leaving out the actual stars drafted far later in the draft.

Let me choose a random draft, say 2008: you are so right that we find Derrick Rose & Russell Westbrook & Kevin Love right at the top. Absolutely great players every one of them! Wow!

But you want to leave out the fact that we also find Michael Beasley, OJ Mayo, & Joe Alexander right up there w/ Rose, Westbrook & Love. & you'd like to think that those 3 guys can be ignored. That they aren't evidence of anything.

Oh, & you'd also like to ignore the fact that Serge Ibaka went at 24 that year. That Ryan Anderson went at 21. That Nic Batum went at 25. That George Hill went at 26. That DeAndre Jordan went at 35. & that Goran Dragic went at 45.

If you want dismiss those guys by dubbing them mere "role players" I can't stop you. But it won't get you an inch in understanding actual reality.

Any more than leaving out Mario Chalmers & Luc Mbah a Moute, who combined to play 22 years in the league.

Repetition doesn't make things true.

I've never argued that there aren't busts at the top the draft. Of course there are, every single year. Part of my process is trying to figure out who is going to underperform vs their draft stock. I've had some great takes and some really bad ones. There's a level of educated guessing involved that will always lead to some incorrect decisions.

However I don't think GMs go into a draft hoping to get a Mbah a Moute level role player for the next decade. In fact most of these guys drafted after the lottery will likely jump teams a few times (or even be dumped) as teams look for something better and eventually younger and cheaper. Specifically, paying 2nd round picks once they hit free agency in alot of cases has not worked out. So you draft a decent guy late, he plays well and your forced to make a financial decision on him sooner than later.

IMO, hitting on late 1sts or 2nd round picks has more intrinsic value when your a playoff team and need that additional role player in a plug & play role. When your Wizards of current or Philly back in the 'trust the process' days, late picks or UFA finds like Robert Covington or Justin Champagnie tend to get overlooked and moved out of the way for the more prestigious prospects regardless of performance.

I remember Robert Covington was destroying the D-League. I thought he might be a cheaper alternative than re-signing Otto Porter.

Justin Champagnie wasn't drafted, and like Dat2U says, regardless of how well he performs, he's most to get passed to another team.

I have to do a search to see how Covington's career progressed.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I can help all you guys out. The best player in this draft will probably be drafted around 9 or 10.

(Not gonna say who it is, but I will say that he turns the low post to a scary scene and has pockets fatter than Dairy Queen).

He's bound to be the "I told you so."

I seriously hope the Spurs draft him.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

So you did. While leaving out the colossal number of busts (or mediocrities) drafted between 4-9 & also leaving out the actual stars drafted far later in the draft.

Let me choose a random draft, say 2008: you are so right that we find Derrick Rose & Russell Westbrook & Kevin Love right at the top. Absolutely great players every one of them! Wow!

But you want to leave out the fact that we also find Michael Beasley, OJ Mayo, & Joe Alexander right up there w/ Rose, Westbrook & Love. & you'd like to think that those 3 guys can be ignored. That they aren't evidence of anything.

Oh, & you'd also like to ignore the fact that Serge Ibaka went at 24 that year. That Ryan Anderson went at 21. That Nic Batum went at 25. That George Hill went at 26. That DeAndre Jordan went at 35. & that Goran Dragic went at 45.

If you want dismiss those guys by dubbing them mere "role players" I can't stop you. But it won't get you an inch in understanding actual reality.

Any more than leaving out Mario Chalmers & Luc Mbah a Moute, who combined to play 22 years in the league.

Repetition doesn't make things true.

I've never argued that there aren't busts at the top the draft. Of course there are, every single year. Part of my process is trying to figure out who is going to underperform vs their draft stock. I've had some great takes and some really bad ones. There's a level of educated guessing involved that will always lead to some incorrect decisions.

However I don't think GMs go into a draft hoping to get a Mbah a Moute level role player for the next decade. In fact most of these guys drafted after the lottery will likely jump teams a few times (or even be dumped) as teams look for something better and eventually younger and cheaper. Specifically, paying 2nd round picks once they hit free agency in alot of cases has not worked out. So you draft a decent guy late, he plays well and your forced to make a financial decision on him sooner than later.

IMO, hitting on late 1sts or 2nd round picks has more intrinsic value when your a playoff team and need that additional role player in a plug & play role. When your Wizards of current or Philly back in the 'trust the process' days, late picks or UFA finds like Robert Covington or Justin Champagnie tend to get overlooked and moved out of the way for the more prestigious prospects regardless of performance.

Good thinking, thanks!

In the end, the key point is that the draft is an environment of extremely high uncertainty. In situations of that kind, one does the best one can. Sometimes, you're smart or lucky or (more realistically) both, & you get Haliburton at 12 or Kawhi at 15 or Jimmy Butler at 30. Sometimes you're dumb or unlucky & get... well... we can all make the list.

No method is certain, everyone makes mistakes, & we all look better in the mirror than the other guy.

Jan Vesley and Johnny Davis were picks dumb and dumber.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

New Mock draft has Wizards taking Maluach at 5 & Traore at 18...

Watch on YouTube

I'd be highly pissed.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Not "as good," better -- every one of the guys you mention except Thor has been substantially better than the guys taken at 2, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28 & 29.

But, it doesn't matter. People *know* that higher picks are "better," because... you know... they're higher. & "higher" is "better." It's "obvious."

That people don't let facts get in the way of such opinions is no surprise either. A year or so ago, one of the top posters here provided what he took to be incontrovertible evidence that Kyle Kuzma was @ the 65th best player among the @500 guys who get minutes in the league each year.

There's just nothing to be done about it. In fact, for quite a while, I gave up trying to make the point about the draft -- just too much dust gets kicked up. But, this is a particularly important draft, so I tried again -- & got the same responses as I usually do.

Does it matter? Nah, of course not! We're just yacking here! & there are plenty of issues where I agree with the very same posters who are wrong per the above stuff.

In this draft, nobody is talking about Eric Dixon. He's going to be a "suprise" on an NBA roster next season.

Well of all the drafts to trade back in, this is probably one of the worst. This is not an especially deep draft, as this is the 1st draft that is really being affected by NIL. Almost anyone with remaining eligibility that's not guaranteed of going in the 1st round will be going back to school. Guys like Isaiah Evans, Kanon Catchings, JT Toppin, Cedric Coward, Ian Jackson, Caleb Love, Boogie Fland, Tahaad Pettiford, Miles Byrd, Alex Condon, Tyrese Proctor, JoJo Tugler are just some of the many potential 2nd round picks that are either already returning to school or likely returning. The player pool from around pick 20 on is essentially being watered down because of players that will make more to stay in school and potentially improve their draft positioning next year are pulling out of the draft. So a player staying in the draft and slotted in the area of 26-28 would probably be slotted more like 36-38 if everyone that could be in the draft was staying in.

So all these players you keep listing and stats about what quality of players were taken where in the draft is moot because it doesn't apply to this draft, because all of those previous drafts you are citing did not have this element of NIL siphoning the quality level of the later picks in the draft.

We shall see.

Lebaron Philon, Joni Broome, Dixon, Vlad Goldin, Ryan Kalkbrenner, John Tonje. Bruce Thornton, Mark Sears, Grant Nelson, and Kam Jones can each make a roster.

Jones is probably better than Bub Carrington IMO.

[gesa2]

LOL this may only be meaningful to me, but it feels like I conclusively demonstrated the deal.

Okay I'll shut up now. Look for rumors of workouts and college kids training for the draft.

Definitely not just meaningful to you doc as the last 2 pages of the thread show! This is really interesting stuff and took some work for you to put together.