Fire Rod Higgins!!!

[fatlever]

Yup. Higgins was a bad drafter. Not Jim Paxson bad, but bad. That doesn't make Cho good though. I like exactly 1 out of his 4 lotto picks in the last 3 years, despite wanting good things to happen to Charlotte I can't justify his talent evaluation skills.

so lets hear your revisionist history for who you think we should have taken with our last 4 picks.

the way i see it

biz - massive boom/bust pick. swung for a home run. was always going to be a pick that would look bad in the short-term. after two years, even as a massive biz fan, we can probably conclude there were better picks to be made. that being said, biz was always picked looking 4-5 years down the road.
kemba - good pick. pg was a need, kemba best pg on the board. he has lived up to his draft spot.
mkg - is mkg going to end up as the 2nd best player in that draft? doubtful. however, he is massively underrated due to a quiet rookie year. in 2-3 years, nobody will be talking about mkg as a bust, they will be talking about his as one of the premier defenders and best glue guy in the league. drummond is the only player i would select ahead of mkg if the draft was re-done today. we didnt need lillard and i wouldnt take barnes or beal ahead of mkg. HE IS ONLY 19. he is as good as barnes or better in every single phase of the game except shooting.
zeller - it would be ridiculous to pass judgement on a pick before they ever play a game. perception suggests he was picked too high because mocks had him closer to the 7-10 range. however, picks should not be judged based on how close they are to mocks. so far, all we have to judge zeller on his summer league, which was a huge success. we needed big men who can score. we got one. hard to argue against that. if in 3 years from now noel is DPOY, len is playing 82 games and averaging 15/10 and mclemore is averaging 25ppg and the best 3pt shooter in the league... meanwhile zeller is merely a OK forward, then we can talk.

one thing that cho has done is change the culture of the team. all four picks are high character, hard working, high IQ, likeable players. nobody will outwork these four players, that is certain.

[Eoghan]

The Brown Frown hung heavily over the '08 draft. Imagine walking away with the FO's #1 pick Brook Lopez and someone like Ibaka. We would be having completely different conversations. And, oh yeah, fire Rod Higgins.

Yeah, I distinctly remember that LB was a big factor in the Ajinca pick. I thought a lot of Ibaka also.

[fatlever]

LB screwed up both picks in 2008. it was all him. however, higgins deserves blame for allowing LB to have that much input on the players. he let LB wreck the team over a two year period, just like he let vincent wreck the 2007 team.

[Durins Baynes]

Zeller is the one pick I like. The other 3 I hated at the time, and don't like now either. You could have drafted some combination of Klay/Kawhi, Klay/Faried along with Drummond/Lillard/Beal. I don't care which combination you went with, it would have been better. Then your line-up could be:
PF- Zeller
SF- Kawhi
C- Drummond
SG- Klay
PG- [Free Agent]

OR

PF- Faried
SF- Kawhi
C- Zeller
SG- Hendo
PG- Lillard

Nor was it like the guys I'm advocating you take were unknown, reach picks at the time. Nbadraft.net's mock had you taking Kawhi on their final mock, at 9th. Sure, we know less than the teams, etc, which is why we judge off the results they get... and the results are not really good.

[fatlever]

just as i expected. revisionist history.

since you have only been on realgm since 2013, we cant go back in time and quote you on the players you liked prior to each draft. its real easy to suggest after the fact who you like. you can pick any team and make a list 3 years later of players they could/should have drafted.

nobody was looking at faried in the top 10 that year. its a bit ridiculous to suggest cho screwed up by selecting kemba walker over faried, who 21 teams passed on. maybe the cavs should have taken faried at 4 instead of tristan. the pistons should have taken tobias harris at 8 instead of knight. stupid wizards should have taken jimmy butler at 6 instead of vesely. obviously i am being extreme.

if everyone knew then what they know now, drummond goes 2. thats an easy call to make now. not many analysts had drummond going two after he was rotten his freshman year and people questions his motor and desire. there is a reason he fell to 9. the bobcats coming off such an awful season were reluctant to take such a huge risk that high. he would have never been the pick at 2. if it wasnt MKG it would have been beal, barnes or robinson.

i will give you that leonard would not have been a stretch at 9 that year. however, who is to say that MKG wont be on leonards level in a coupe of years. leonard had 3 years of college and now two years in the NBA and plays on a team with 3 hall of famers who keep defenses focused elsewhere. MKG is 19 and outside of shooting, MKG pretty much does everything that leonard does. do you really think leonard would get the same hype if he was stuck on a team two years ago with dj augustin, klay thompson, byron mullens and boris diaw? that team still wins less than 10 games and leonard looks like a role player while is fg% drops 5pts due to playing on such an awful team. he is done playing in mid-april and nobody outside of charlotte, san diego and zach lowe will have watched him play more than 2 games.

we can argue kemba and lillard for weeks. despite the massive hype surrounding lillard, there is very little that separates both players, yet. of course you tried to claim in the kemba vs lillard thread a bunch of BS about how lillard was more athletic than kemba which was proven as a baseless claim. lillard is taller and a better shooter and plays at a more consistent pace. kemba is quicker, more streaky (good and bad) and better defender and has played with the worst frontcourt in NBA history the past 2 years. i'd love to see lillard run the pick and role with byron mullens, tyrus thomas and brendan haywood. he would get blitzed with double teams every play, just like what happens to kemba. good luck with that.

[Liver_Pooty]

Zeller is the one pick I like. The other 3 I hated at the time, and don't like now either. You could have drafted some combination of Klay/Kawhi, Klay/Faried along with Drummond/Lillard/Beal. I don't care which combination you went with, it would have been better. Then your line-up could be:
PF- Zeller
SF- Kawhi
C- Drummond
SG- Klay
PG- [Free Agent]

OR

PF- Faried
SF- Kawhi
C- Zeller
SG- Hendo
PG- Lillard

Nor was it like the guys I'm advocating you take were unknown, reach picks at the time. Nbadraft.net's mock had you taking Kawhi on their final mock, at 9th. Sure, we know less than the teams, etc, which is why we judge off the results they get... and the results are not really good.

Its so stupid when people go back and say who a certain team should have picked 3 years in a row. If a team picks a stud one year, they won't be in line to have near the same pick the next year. By your philosophy after drafting Faried, Leonard, etc we would have been in line to draft Lillard, and Zeller this year.

Sorry, thats just not how it works.

[Durins Baynes]

You can't have it all ways at once. I agree that we as fans have access to far less information and resources for the draft, and so what we know is only a fraction of what GM's know. That's why, for instance, I never try to second guess the Spurs front office, even though I usually know next to nothing about their obscure picks. I am willing to trust their record a little bit. But the way we get to ultimately assess that record is to look at the results in hindsight, not based on what some mock website guessed. That's because like us, the mock websites don't have the same information and resources, and are not investing millions of dollars in these decisions.

I'm willing to give some slack for genuinely unexpected stuff- like Oden getting injured, or Jay Williams getting into a motorcycle accident. But "nobody knew this guy would be good" is not a good reason to handwave bad picks. Since everyone misses some players, the way people usually look at it (to see if you got good value) is to ask if the player would be in the top X picks. So will Biyombo end up as one of the top 7 picks in the 2011 draft? Clearly not. I think the Bobcats fail 2 of those tests easily (Biyombo and MKG) and I'm not sure Kemba makes that cut either. If the Cats didn't know Drummond was going to be good, they should have. Or at least should have taken Beal. And if they hadn't locked themselves into Kemba in 2011 they could have taken Lillard too. I dislike the idea that a player like Kemba should lock you into anything, he's just not that good. In retrospect there were many better players available, and the Cats missed them. That's the reason you're ripping Higgins after all- that his picks turned out bad, not that they were wholly unreasonable at the time. And you're right, that's how we should assess the picks by and large.

[SpearNMgicHelmt]

Lol looking back at the '08 draft and all the solid platers that were picked in the 15-30 range we just HAD to get Ajinca. Makes me so sick all I can do is laugh.

As I remember it, we made the trade for the pick that we got Ajinca with not knowing whether we'd end up with Ajinca, Hibbert, or Hickson. But they knew that one of those would be available.

After we ended up with Ajinca, they talked him up. But I always figured it was Hibbert that they would have rather had.

[fatlever]

Since everyone misses some players, the way people usually look at it (to see if you got good value) is to ask if the player would be in the top X picks. So will Biyombo end up as one of the top 7 picks in the 2011 draft? Clearly not. I think the Bobcats fail 2 of those tests easily (Biyombo and MKG) and I'm not sure Kemba makes that cut either.

with that logic, any #1 pick who doesnt turn out the be the absolute best player in the draft is a bad pick. for arguments sake, lets say that drummond and lillard end up at the two best players from 2012 draft with davis being the 3rd best. does that make the davis pick a bad one? should we laugh at the pelicans?

mkg might not end up as the 2nd best player in the 2012 draft, but i feel very confident that he will be top 5 when its all said and done. mkg had a high floor and high ceiling as a draft pick. he was never going to be a bust, because at the absolute very worst he will be what he was last year, 10/6 with great defense and super high bball iq, work ethic and character and a great glue guy.

If the Cats didn't know Drummond was going to be good, they should have. Or at least should have taken Beal.

what makes you so certain that beal will be better than mkg when its all said and done? how can you even begin to make such absolute statements about a draft after one year? how can you judge the youngest player in the league after one year? its ridiculous.

And if they hadn't locked themselves into Kemba in 2011 they could have taken Lillard too. I dislike the idea that a player like Kemba should lock you into anything, he's just not that good.

there is still no basis to your claim that lillard is a clearly better player than kemba. thats just your opinion and its not based on anything other than your personal bias. as of now, they are very close. lets revisit this topic in another two years. maybe you are correct and lillard keeps improving and kemba doesnt. kudos to you if that happens. as of right now, they are basically about the same.

and by your logic you think the bobcats should have passed on kemba in 2011 because they could draft lillard in 2012? it doesnt work that way. the bobcats needed a pg and they selected one who was also probably the best player available according to most mocks.

maybe the cavs should have passed on tristan because anthony bennett would be available the next year. that logic doesnt fly.

In retrospect there were many better players available, and the Cats missed them. That's the reason you're ripping Higgins after all- that his picks turned out bad, not that they were wholly unreasonable at the time. And you're right, that's how we should assess the picks by and large.

higgins gets ripped because he missed on picks for a decade straight, not just one or two years. he missed on all of them except dudley and ellis. if cho misses on picks for a decade straight then he should be ripped accordingly. so far i am only willing to admit that cho missed on biyombo and even that one is still debatable due to how raw biz was and how everyone knew it was a 5 year project.

and back to kemba being a bad pick at 9.

i am curious to see how you would redraft the 2011 draft and where you would rank kemba. go for it.

[Durins Baynes]

with that logic, any #1 pick who doesnt turn out the be the absolute best player in the draft is a bad pick. for arguments sake, lets say that drummond and lillard end up at the two best players from 2012 draft with davis being the 3rd best. does that make the davis pick a bad one? should we laugh at the pelicans?

If you've got the top pick you should get either the top player, or someone comparable to the top player. For instance, some people think Curry or Harden are better players than Blake Griffin. But Griffin is basically as good, so I don't think there are good grounds to criticise the Clippers at this juncture. If Lillard goes on to be Gary Payton and Anthony Davis becomes Joe Smith 2 then yes, we should definitely judge the Pelicans for their bad pick.

mkg might not end up as the 2nd best player in the 2012 draft, but i feel very confident that he will be top 5 when its all said and done. mkg had a high floor and high ceiling as a draft pick. he was never going to be a bust, because at the absolute very worst he will be what he was last year, 10/6 with great defense and super high bball iq, work ethic and character and a great glue guy.

Then you should have traded down to 5, because using the #2 pick on a guy who will maybe be top 5 in his draft class is a bad plan. Especially when you were offered Harden for that pick (Presti wanted to use it to draft Beal). Huge fail I'd say.

what makes you so certain that beal will be better than mkg when its all said and done? how can you even begin to make such absolute statements about a draft after one year? how can you judge the youngest player in the league after one year? its ridiculous.

Everything I see about Beal, I like. He has a skill-set and tools that all scream future star. MKG does not, and has never really been that player. He looks like a super role player, not a star. I also pay a lot of attention to the fact that not only do I really like him, but Presti and the Spurs front office apparently really liked him. 2 front offices I give a lot of flex to when it comes to talent evaluation.

and by your logic you think the bobcats should have passed on kemba in 2011 because they could draft lillard in 2012? it doesnt work that way. the bobcats needed a pg and they selected one who was also probably the best player available according to most mocks.

maybe the cavs should have passed on tristan because anthony bennett would be available the next year. that logic doesnt fly.

The Bobcats should have passed on Kemba because there were better players available, and you draft on talent, not need. Spend some money on a point guard in free agency, and draft the better player.

redraft would be something like (not an exact order):
Irving, Val, Kawhi, Klay, Kanter, Parsons, Faried, R.Jax. Then I'd start talking about guys like Kemba along with T.Harris, Vucevic, J.Butler, Shump, Mirotic, etc. And I guess Derrick Williams if he turns things around, though I'm not a fan right now. Maybe Kemba was 9th overall, but it's not clear. Biyombo sure wasn't top 7 though, and MKG (even at the time) was a bad #2 pick. Nobody projected him as more than a super role player, and if the Bobcats did then they look like they were wrong.

The problem with rationalisations like "it made sense at the time" is that almost every bad draft pick can be justified with that logic.

[fatlever]

If Lillard goes on to be Gary Payton and Anthony Davis becomes Joe Smith 2 then yes, we should definitely judge the Pelicans for their bad pick.

30 teams last year would have drafted davis at #1, including your beloved spurs and thunder.

Then you should have traded down to 5, because using the #2 pick on a guy who will maybe be top 5 in his draft class is a bad plan.

mkg would have never lasted to #5. he would have been gone at 3 or 4.

this notion that players are bad picks if they are not eventually equal to the spot they were drafted is absurd. real life doesnt work like that. there are always 1000s of variables involved. a player that might be a good fit with one team is might not be a good fit with another. this isnt fantasy basketball. you have to account for other factors, such as current roster, fit with teammates and coach, style of play, the draftees willingness to come to your town and stay beyond a rookie deal, potential off court problems etc... you talk like drafting is done in a vacuum and rating players is black and white.

there is a huge difference between drafting a player at #2, who eventually is considered by most to be the 5th best player in the draft and drafting a bust.

for example, abdur-rahim was drafted #3 back in 1996 (a loaded draft). in hindsight there were several players after him that turned out to be better - kobe, nash, ray allen and some others who had similar impacts jermaine oneal, peja etc... in a redraft done today, rahim doesnt go 3rd, but it wasnt a bad pick. he was a good player for a long time. most teams would be thrilled to get an abdur-rahim out of top 5 pick each year.

Especially when you were offered Harden for that pick (Presti wanted to use it to draft Beal). Huge fail I'd say.

the bobcats were rumored to be in talks with a lot of teams for that #2 pick, but we dont know for sure what was really offered. and even if the harden rumors were true, there is no telling if harden would have agreed to an extension with the bobcats, which would really have been a fail. perhaps cho reached out to harden's agent to gauge his interest and it wasnt mutual, so the bobcats moved on. again, too many variable and unknowns...

Everything I see about Beal, I like. He has a skill-set and tools that all scream future star. MKG does not, and has never really been that player. He looks like a super role player, not a star.

beal has a skill set that screams #2 scoring option on a good team, #3 scoring option on a great team, #1 option on a bad team. future all-star? maybe only because the current young talent at shooting guard around the league is lacking. that being said "draft on talent, not need" seems that by your logic the wizards screwed up by not selecting drummond or lillard instead.

redraft would be something like (not an exact order):
Irving, Val, Kawhi, Klay, Kanter, Parsons, Faried, R.Jax. Then I'd start talking about guys like Kemba along with T.Harris, Vucevic, J.Butler, Shump, Mirotic, etc. And I guess Derrick Williams if he turns things around, though I'm not a fan right now. Maybe Kemba was 9th overall, but it's not clear.

wait, so you said kemba was a bad pick because he wasnt the 9th best player. when i asked you to tell us who was better you listed exactly 8 players ahead of kemba. so, even you agree that kemba was the 9th best player in that draft. and did you just rank reggie jackson ahead of kemba? why? because presti drafted him? how about you wait until reggie proves it playing real minutes for an entire season where he is being gameplanned by defenses before you make that leap.

OK, i'm out on this discussion. its run its course.

[Durins Baynes]

30 teams last year would have drafted davis at #1, including your beloved spurs and thunder.

Well I agree with that, because I think Davis will be the #1 player from the 2012 draft. However that said, let's not act like we know what these teams would have done. I rarely see anyone correctly predicting the Spurs moves, so let's not just assume they'd have taken such and such a player with no evidence.

mkg would have never lasted to #5. he would have been gone at 3 or 4.

No proof of that. And even if he was gone, so what? You just draft Barnes or Drummond and enjoy the extra asset you got for trading down.

this notion that players are bad picks if they are not eventually equal to the spot they were drafted is absurd. real life doesnt work like that. there are always 1000s of variables involved. a player that might be a good fit with one team is might not be a good fit with another. this isnt fantasy basketball. you have to account for other factors, such as current roster, fit with teammates and coach, style of play, the draftees willingness to come to your town and stay beyond a rookie deal, potential off court problems etc... you talk like drafting is done in a vacuum and rating players is black and white.

Your alternative method of "hey, it made sense to me at the time" is 100 times worse. Sure there is context- like injuries and such, but since we don't actually know what was going on inside the war room for these teams, and we have no idea what info they had, grading them on actual results should be the primary method of assessing them. Virtually every bad pick ever can be judged a good one using your criteria.

there is a huge difference between drafting a player at #2, who eventually is considered by most to be the 5th best player in the draft and drafting a bust.

Sure. Nobody said Cho is a terrible GM, he's not as bad as Higgins or Jim Paxson at drafting for instance. But at least 50% of his lotto picks for you have been the wrong picks (probably more like 75%). That certainly doesn't make him good, in fact I'd call him distinctly average. If average is what you want, great. I'm a bit fussier.

for example, abdur-rahim was drafted #3 back in 1996 (a loaded draft). in hindsight there were several players after him that turned out to be better - kobe, nash, ray allen and some others who had similar impacts jermaine oneal, peja etc... in a redraft done today, rahim doesnt go 3rd, but it wasnt a bad pick. he was a good player for a long time. most teams would be thrilled to get an abdur-rahim out of top 5 pick each year.

Shareef was a terrible pick. Trust me, you won't find any Grizzlies fans who liked that pick. Their GM should be raked over the coals for that decision.

the bobcats were rumored to be in talks with a lot of teams for that #2 pick, but we dont know for sure what was really offered. and even if the harden rumors were true, there is no telling if harden would have agreed to an extension with the bobcats, which would really have been a fail. perhaps cho reached out to harden's agent to gauge his interest and it wasnt mutual, so the bobcats moved on. again, too many variable and unknowns...

Well there's a lot of talk that it was offered, and Cho hasn't denied it. I believe it, especially when even before the draft there were rumours about how much Presti wanted Beal, and that he'd offered Harden. It was reported everywhere. And the beauty of trading for Harden is that he doesn't need to want to stay- he's on a qualifying offer, and nobody who is offered the max takes the qualifying offer and waits out the year. Nobody. You were all but guaranteed to retain him.

beal has a skill set that screams #2 scoring option on a good team, #3 scoring option on a great team, #1 option on a bad team. future all-star? maybe only because the current young talent at shooting guard around the league is lacking. that being said "draft on talent, not need" seems that by your logic the wizards screwed up by not selecting drummond or lillard instead.

The Wizards got a guy who could easily be the 3rd best player in the draft. They missed Drummond, but I'm not ready to say Beal won't be better than Lillard. Beal looks great.

wait, so you said kemba was a bad pick because he wasnt the 9th best player. when i asked you to tell us who was better you listed exactly 8 players ahead of kemba. so, even you agree that kemba was the 9th best player in that draft. and did you just rank reggie jackson ahead of kemba? why? because presti drafted him? how about you wait until reggie proves it playing real minutes for an entire season where he is being gameplanned by defenses before you make that leap.

No, I think there are 9+ guys I'd take ahead of Kemba. However in fairness to Kemba, the story is not told yet for some of the guys he is in the same tier with, so I'm listing them in a clump. Like I said, I think Kemba will likely prove a mistake, but I haven't pronounced final judgement on him in the same way as MKG and Biyombo. R.Jax looks much better than Kemba, he's probably going to have to be traded in a year or two, to avoid another Harden situation (getting an offer the Thunder can't pay). This time, teams won't be too dumb to offer proper value for R.Jax though. Not after the Harden disaster, where a tonne of teams (like yours) turned down wholly reasonable packages for no sensible reason.

[Elden Payton]

Troll is obvious.

Reggie Jackson is better than Kemba?

Damn.

Please go away.

[Durins Baynes]

I can understand a lot of people not knowing much about Reggie Jackson, because OKC has brought him along slowly. But in a year you're going to look bad for taking him lightly. He's a fantastic player:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX8QIerWodA[/youtube]

[Elden Payton]

Your belief that Reggie Jackson is better than Kemba Walker is just your opinion.

30 out of 30 GM's would take Kemba is my opinion.

Absolutely laughable that you would take Reggie Jackson...

[fatlever]

i'm gonna pass on responding to the rest of the post, but had to jump back in on abdur-rahim.

a) find me a fan of the vancouver grizzlies from the mid 90s. i'd like to talk to them.
b) "raked over the coals" for selecting abdur-rahim? was he the best player in that draft? no. was he 3rd best? no. was he a really good player while he was with the grizzlies? yes. did he put up some inflated stats on a bad team? yes. did he have any help while he was there? no. 5 seasons ranging from 18.7ppg to 23.0ppg. one season of 20/10. eventual all-star (albeit he had to get out of a miserable situation to get that recognition). 1st team all-rookie. the trade they made with atlanta landed them a #3 pick used on pao gasol. hoopshype recently ranked him the 3rd best player in franchise history. yeah, such an awful pick. worked out horribly for them. they got 5 years of 20ppg and 8rpg and landed an top 3 for him when they decided to part ways.

[Durins Baynes]

Shareef made a singular all-star team (in a weak year in a weak conference), he was an overrated player, and that pick was terrible. Obviously I can't prove what a 90's Grizz fan would think, but I'll tell you what- go to the PC board and start a thread "Was Shareef a decent pick for the Grizzlies in 1996?" It won't go the way you hope.

[fatlever]

I can understand a lot of people not knowing much about Reggie Jackson, because OKC has brought him along slowly. But in a year you're going to look bad for taking him lightly. He's a fantastic player:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX8QIerWodA[/youtube]

like i said, when he does it as a starter against 1st team defenses for 30+ minutes a night and for a full season with defenses gameplanning to stop him, then i will give him more praise. but even his per 36 numbers are worse than kemba's however.

and do you not think that kemba would look fantastic playing next to the likes of durant, westbrook, ibaka, harden, martin over the past 2 years? you think that maybe JUST MAYBE, kemba wouldnt be facing constant double-teams if he had those guys on the floor with him?

[Durins Baynes]

That was a game where they rested their top players actually. But sure, I think it's fair to say "I want to wait and see", but I feel confident that's how it'll play out.

[Diop]

I liked Shareef Abdur Rahim