Serious Question: Since 2010, how many top 3 picks became busts?

[Harry Garris]

okafor just came in at the wrong time. If he was drafted between 2007-2014, he would had an all star career

2013 draft class might be the worst ive seen

No, Okafor would have been a bad player in any era because he was such a poor defender. Even in the early 2000s when the NBA was as slow and post centric as ever you still couldn't play a center who was a sieve on defense.

[Doctor MJ]

Here's who comes to mind right away for me

2010
2 - Evan Turner
3 - Derrick Favors

2011
2 - Derrick Williams
3 - Enes Kanter

2012
2 - Michael Kidd-Gilchrist

2013
1 - Anthony Bennett
2 - Victor Oladipo
3 - Otto Porter Jr

2014
2 - Jabari Parker

2015
3 - Jahill Okafor

2016
NONE

2017
1 - Markelle Fultz (As a Magic fan I hope he turns it around)
2 - Lonzo Ball

2018
2 - Marvin Bagley

2019
1 - Zion Williamson (Potentially)

2020
2 - James Wiseman

On average, at least 1.36 busts a year.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I think you're largely defining "bust" to be "disappointing relative to expectation", and when you do that, it makes sense that nearly half the players would qualify.

I think finding the right threshold for "bust" is hard because I do think expectation has to be involved, but at the same time, if a player becomes a legit valuable player who plays along time and keeps getting paid at non-minimum levels, I think calling him a "bust" gives the wrong implications.

So when I look at your list:

I find Favors to be debatable. Certainly a bit of a disappointment, but he's still getting paid 8 digit salaries more than a decade into his career, and with a career earnings in the 9 digits. If you're a young person dreaming of making it as an NBA player, this is unquestionably a success.

I don't think it makes sense to call Oladipo a bust. I think at his peak he was arguably more impressive than what was expected out of college. If you want to call him an "injury bust" a la Oden or what you're speculating for Zion, I get that, but to me it's important to recognize it as a separate category.

I don't see any argument for Porter as a bust to be honest. I get thinking he should have been more than he is based on him being a #3 pick, but the 2013 draft was notoriously weak (among its known top prospects that is), and Washington drafted Porter with the expectation of him being their 3rd banana, which he did pretty well.

I'll note in 2014 that you're not including Wiggins. I'd be inclined to agree that he should not be included at this point, but that's a recent change for me. He's a massive disappointment compared to the hype, and he was absolutely a bust for Minnesota. The fact he's doing as well as he is in GS makes him now an NBA success story though, to say nothing about the fact that I expect him to get another meaty contract next time he's up (though still a pay cut compared to what Minny gave him).

Re: 2015. To be honest, part of me wants to include Russell on the bust list. I think you're probably right not to include him - that he's done enough to avoid the categorization - but he's certainly been a disappointment to a degree.

Re: 2016. I think Ben Simmons deserves a shout out here. Given his contract and all-star appearances this seems like a clear cut "non-bust" situation, but it's just plain a fact that the 76ers were not well-served by picking him and if he never does anything positive on the basketball court again, I'm going to think of him as a bust.

Re: Lonzo. I don't think of him as a bust. That might be strange given that the Lakers chose him at #2 to be a future star and to kick Russell to the curb - who has since been named all-star and got a 9 figure deal - but while Lonzo didn't live up to all the hype, to me he's a fundamentally solid player who could be part of a contending core...which I wouldn't say about Russell.

Re: 2019. I get why you're including Zion here for the injuries stated above, but it's frankly weird to me to see Zion's name on here, and not RJ Barrett. You're probably just going by the fact that Zion was the bigger prospect and I get that, but I do think it's worth noting that Barrett was the top college recruit that year, not Zion. And given that Zion in his 2nd year in the NBA almost certainly played considerably better than Barrett ever will, to me that says something about Barrett not living up to the hype.

[Doctor MJ]

okafor just came in at the wrong time. If he was drafted between 2007-2014, he would had an all star career

2013 draft class might be the worst ive seen

No, Okafor would have been a bad player in any era because he was such a poor defender. Even in the early 2000s when the NBA was as slow and post centric as ever you still couldn't play a center who was a sieve on defense.

I think you're kinda both right.

Okafor is the type of bad player who probably would have been named all-star in an earlier era simply because he was a scorer.

[imDatknicksTape]

okafor just came in at the wrong time. If he was drafted between 2007-2014, he would had an all star career

2013 draft class might be the worst ive seen

No, Okafor would have been a bad player in any era because he was such a poor defender. Even in the early 2000s when the NBA was as slow and post centric as ever you still couldn't play a center who was a sieve on defense.

I think you're kinda both right.

Okafor is the type of bad player who probably would have been named all-star in an earlier era simply because he was a scorer.

Okafor was nice af, al jefferson was nice too he didnt get all star nod because the center position was filled with mega stars in early 2000s

[Dadouv47]

Counting Zion and even Wiseman is a bit premature. Lonzo definitely not a bust. Oladipo had 2 great seasons and won MOY so it's difficult to call him a bust even if he didn't reach full potential.

but yeah overall a top 3 pick looks better on paper and u have a significant risk of drafting a bust or only a meh NBA starter.

[HotelVitale]

okafor just came in at the wrong time. If he was drafted between 2007-2014, he would had an all star career

2013 draft class might be the worst ive seen

No, Okafor would have been a bad player in any era because he was such a poor defender. Even in the early 2000s when the NBA was as slow and post centric as ever you still couldn't play a center who was a sieve on defense.

I think you're kinda both right. Okafor is the type of bad player who probably would have been named all-star in an earlier era simply because he was a scorer.

I've heard this point so many times over the years and it's always made by people who just really like the idea (and bad/overly simple history) and who haven't actually examined it. My short counter to it is that Jahlil Okafor was always too slow at EVERYthing in the NBA, that made him a dreadful defender in space but he also was an extremely slow and plodding post scorer who took forever to get a bucket, so much so that he would've never been a viable low post scorer in the 80s-2000s. People have this caricature in their minds of the game before 2012 as glacially slow and people moving at like 40% of the speed they do now--they mistake the fact that the game was more crowded and the pace of shots slower for the idea that the actual movements in games and the speed you needed to act and react was slower. It wasn't, and Okafor was hampered precisely by having very slow action/reaction time, physically and mentally he couldn't be effective at NBA speed.

I won't go through the whole argument here, I'll just show this one short video of the person that Okafor at best would've been in the 2000s--Eddy Curry, the most one-dimensional big-bodied slow post scorer of his era. Curry was as slow as Okafor on defense and like Okafor was bad enough at shooting, passing, etc that his sole job was to go to work as a post scorer for about 20-25 minutes per game. You can see by this one video of an average Curry game that he was much much quicker getting into his moves and getting rid of the ball than Okafor ever was, was able to fit his low-post scoring style into NBA speed in a way Okafor never was. He doesn't ball stop and gets to the cup quickly, almost never takes more than 2 dribbles. When they tried to give Curry the ball more and move more slowly into his moves, it never worked out even at the slowest pace and most post-friendly time in the game's history.

Watch on YouTube

;ab_channel=KentBlazemore

[facothomas22]

Lonzo clearly hasn't met the expectations that's expected out of a 2nd overall pick,but can't say he's a bust. A bust in my opinion is a player who not only fails to reach any of the expectations that given before the draft,but aslo a player who just can't impact the game in any meaningful way. That also removes Victor from any bust conversations and he actually had a season where he was a all star.

[Harry Garris]

okafor just came in at the wrong time. If he was drafted between 2007-2014, he would had an all star career

2013 draft class might be the worst ive seen

No, Okafor would have been a bad player in any era because he was such a poor defender. Even in the early 2000s when the NBA was as slow and post centric as ever you still couldn't play a center who was a sieve on defense.

I think you're kinda both right.

Okafor is the type of bad player who probably would have been named all-star in an earlier era simply because he was a scorer.

Okafor would have had a chance at an all star team during that weird time period from 2008-2014 where we had a dearth of star level centers in the league and we still weren't totally playing modern basketball yet so traditional centers still had to take up an all star spot. Maybe he makes it over Roy Hibbert. Okafor wasn't making an all star team in the 80s or 90s though.

[Exp0sed]

I can't believe the Bucks picked Jabari over Embiid. Jeez...

List sounds about right although I think it's too early to call Bagley a bust. Don't know if I would call Oladipo one either, 2 time all start, all-NBA defensive team.

Embiid had a huge injury concern and it was the reason why he was not the first overall pick.He did not play in the first 2 years too

Yeah but it's not like Embiid went from top pick to 27th, he was picked 3rd lol. Anyway, it doesn't matter, Bucks got Giannis and won a ring, but looking back that was definitely a head scratcher.

I don't think it's such a head scratcher, it makes perfect sense
Not like Embiid was a sure thing, he was a Heavy big man with considerable injury concerns
since Wiggins and Jabari were both seen and touted as "elite" prospects, Cle and Mil decided to play it safe, fearing wasting a 1-2 pick on a potential complete bust (because of injuries mostly)

after Wiggins and Parker, no1 was seen as true high ceiling prospect and Philly decided to take the gamble and shoot for the stars

they could have passed too, he could have fell a few spots more until he found the team willing to swing for high risk\high reward fence. The lower down he falls - the more it makes sense to take him there

as it so happened the buck stopped at #3, nothing head scratching about it imo

[BK_2020]

I would say only busts are Okafor, Bennett, and possibly Bagley. The jury's still out on Wiseman.
Maybe even Okafor can't be considered a bust. He had a 6 year career.

[Doctor MJ]

No, Okafor would have been a bad player in any era because he was such a poor defender. Even in the early 2000s when the NBA was as slow and post centric as ever you still couldn't play a center who was a sieve on defense.

I think you're kinda both right. Okafor is the type of bad player who probably would have been named all-star in an earlier era simply because he was a scorer.

I've heard this point so many times over the years and it's always made by people who just really like the idea (and bad/overly simple history) and who haven't actually examined it. My short counter to it is that Jahlil Okafor was always too slow at EVERYthing in the NBA, that made him a dreadful defender in space but he also was an extremely slow and plodding post scorer who took forever to get a bucket, so much so that he would've never been a viable low post scorer in the 80s-2000s. People have this caricature in their minds of the game before 2012 as glacially slow and people moving at like 40% of the speed they do now--they mistake the fact that the game was more crowded and the pace of shots slower for the idea that the actual movements in games and the speed you needed to act and react was slower. It wasn't, and Okafor was hampered precisely by having very slow action/reaction time, physically and mentally he couldn't be effective at NBA speed.

I won't go through the whole argument here, I'll just show this one short video of the person that Okafor at best would've been in the 2000s--Eddy Curry, the most one-dimensional big-bodied slow post scorer of his era. Curry was as slow as Okafor on defense and like Okafor was bad enough at shooting, passing, etc that his sole job was to go to work as a post scorer for about 20-25 minutes per game. You can see by this one video of an average Curry game that he was much much quicker getting into his moves and getting rid of the ball than Okafor ever was, was able to fit his low-post scoring style into NBA speed in a way Okafor never was. He doesn't ball stop and gets to the cup quickly, almost never takes more than 2 dribbles. When they tried to give Curry the ball more and move more slowly into his moves, it never worked out even at the slowest pace and most post-friendly time in the game's history.

Eh, well, thing is that Okafor in his rookie campaign scored 17.5 PPG on a TS% that was almost up to league average. Had he played in an earlier era, where league average was worse, he'd have had above average TS%. And of course, in an earlier era, people wouldn't be looking at TS%, they'd be looking at FG%, where someone like Okafor looks even better.

Hence, what I'm suggesting is that in an earlier era that rookie campaign likely would have led his franchise to say "Alright, we've got our star scorer!" and then to double down on it, allowing Okafor to keep refining his game getting better bit by bit at the thing that people were convinced was valuable.

Doesn't necessarily mean Okafor would be an all-star, but he likely would have been someone that some folks thought deserved to be an all-star despite the fact that he probably never would have gotten to the point where any team should be happy with him on the court.

Re: Curry in the '00s. I think if you want to make the argument that by the '00s it was already too late for Okafor, I don't really want to argue against you.

I will say though that I don't think the reason why Okafor stopped getting opportunity in his rookie year while Curry kept getting opportunities for years after was because Curry looked better at it as a rookie than Okafor. I think that was a combination of several things including era difference, but the biggest factor was surely the arrival of Joel Embiid in Philly.

[loserX]

No, Okafor would have been a bad player in any era because he was such a poor defender. Even in the early 2000s when the NBA was as slow and post centric as ever you still couldn't play a center who was a sieve on defense.

I think you're kinda both right.

Okafor is the type of bad player who probably would have been named all-star in an earlier era simply because he was a scorer.

Okafor was nice af, al jefferson was nice too he didnt get all star nod because the center position was filled with mega stars in early 2000s

As one of Big Al's few stans, i feel obliged to point out that while he never made an All-Star team...he did once make 3rd team all NBA

[tsherkin]

Eh, well, thing is that Okafor in his rookie campaign scored 17.5 PPG on a TS% that was almost up to league average. Had he played in an earlier era, where league average was worse, he'd have had above average TS%. And of course, in an earlier era, people wouldn't be looking at TS%, they'd be looking at FG%, where someone like Okafor looks even better.

Hence, what I'm suggesting is that in an earlier era that rookie campaign likely would have led his franchise to say "Alright, we've got our star scorer!" and then to double down on it, allowing Okafor to keep refining his game getting better bit by bit at the thing that people were convinced was valuable.

Doesn't necessarily mean Okafor would be an all-star, but he likely would have been someone that some folks thought deserved to be an all-star despite the fact that he probably never would have gotten to the point where any team should be happy with him on the court.

Re: Curry in the '00s. I think if you want to make the argument that by the '00s it was already too late for Okafor, I don't really want to argue against you.

I will say though that I don't think the reason why Okafor stopped getting opportunity in his rookie year while Curry kept getting opportunities for years after was because Curry looked better at it as a rookie than Okafor. I think that was a combination of several things including era difference, but the biggest factor was surely the arrival of Joel Embiid in Philly.

If you want to sell that he could have been Bill Cartwright in the early 80s, sure. But yeah, Eddy Curry, Emeka Okafor, Al Jefferson. These are not names who summon up a chain of ASG appearances.

And he didn't have the defense to be anything like Jermaine O'neal. Maybe, maybe you sell out and get a Chris Kaman season but it seems very unlikely. There weren't a ton of inefficient, volume-scoring centers making the ASG in that stretch. You had Cousins, but he could rebound and pass more effectively and was actually a 105 TS+ guy at least in 2018, but he's sort of it. Your classic "has all the post moves but can't actually score efficiently" players weren't really getting it done in that regard, so there isn't huge reason to believe that Okafor would either. Brook Lopez, who was a better scorer, didn't make it either. He was a 4x 20+ ppg scorer and 3x at 18.8+ beyond that.

Teams were looking for a post scorer, but very, very few of them ended up working out to a noteworthy level and Boogie is about the only one who really got more ASG play than he should have.

Oh, right. Vucevic. 2x All-Star. 102 and 98 TS+, but 57.3% and 56.0% TS. That's more in line with your guys who were efficient relative to an earlier era but are not now.

Domatas Sabonis, but he's above league average efficiency. 104, 105 TS+ in his 2x All-Star seasons.

Zach Randolph as a PF got himself to a pair of All-Star games with significant rebounding and crappy scoring.

LaMarcus Aldridge kind of counts here, I guess? He was more of a shooter without 3pt range, but he had and used post moves, scored at league average efficiency (on average) while making several ASGs. But again, he was more known for low turnover rate and his long 2pt jumper than anything else.

But in general, it wasn't really a thing where crappy volume scorers who worked in the post were significant AS threats. With Pau and Dwight and Shaq (early) and Duncan and so forth, there weren't a lot of frontcourt slots for people who were actually bad.

As far as teams, they certainly tried it, but it rarely panned out and it even more rarely turned into any kind of AS love for the players involved. 2010-2019, there were some guys but it wasn't thaaaat common for them to be looked on well enough. You'd have to go back maybe into the 90s to find lack of understanding that wall, and even then, teams had some appreciation for the idea that they needed passing, and most of the guys who were doing this kind of post scoring weren't that hot at moving the ball.

[Beethoven]

Spoiler:

Here's who comes to mind right away for me

2010
2 - Evan Turner
3 - Derrick Favors

2011
2 - Derrick Williams
3 - Enes Kanter

2012
2 - Michael Kidd-Gilchrist

2013
1 - Anthony Bennett
2 - Victor Oladipo
3 - Otto Porter Jr

2014
2 - Jabari Parker

2015
3 - Jahill Okafor

2016
NONE

2017
1 - Markelle Fultz (As a Magic fan I hope he turns it around)
2 - Lonzo Ball

2018
2 - Marvin Bagley

2019
1 - Zion Williamson (Potentially)

2020
2 - James Wiseman

On average, at least 1.36 busts a year.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Not sure if you can consider Wiseman and Ball yet. Maybe Potentially like you put Zion.

I would include Ben simmons too, if these three above are on there.

[DrCoach]

I
Favors, Kanter , Dipo and Ball are not busts

[Beethoven]

I
Favors, Kanter , Dipo and Ball are not busts

Correct. lot of playes go through phases of injury during their careers and also most just become avg nba players. If these are busts, then you got to label half the NBA as busts.

[sp6r=underrated]

You really need a definition of bust to answer this question as Wiggins demonstrates.

The best historical parallel I could find for Andrew Wiggins was Danny Ferry. Ferry wasn't as hyped as Wiggins of course, who had generational hype, but he was pegged as an elite prospect. He never came close to being All-NBA. So from the perspective of his draft hype he was a bust.

He also lasted 13 years and become an early stretch big and was a nice contributor to the early Pop-Duncan teams. From that perspective he was a decent player.

[Johnny Bball]

Spoiler:

Here's who comes to mind right away for me

2010
2 - Evan Turner
3 - Derrick Favors

2011
2 - Derrick Williams
3 - Enes Kanter

2012
2 - Michael Kidd-Gilchrist

2013
1 - Anthony Bennett
2 - Victor Oladipo
3 - Otto Porter Jr

2014
2 - Jabari Parker

2015
3 - Jahill Okafor

2016
NONE

2017
1 - Markelle Fultz (As a Magic fan I hope he turns it around)
2 - Lonzo Ball

2018
2 - Marvin Bagley

2019
1 - Zion Williamson (Potentially)

2020
2 - James Wiseman

On average, at least 1.36 busts a year.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Not sure if you can consider Wiseman and Ball yet. Maybe Potentially like you put Zion.

I would include Ben simmons too, if these three above are on there.

How much was Ben Simmons just traded for? That's not a bust.

[timO]

Lonzo at 2 is a REAL bust

tatum-mitchell-adebayo-allen are way better

even Fox and OG

thats 6 players better to pick him at 2

[ishoy123]

I would say only busts are Okafor, Bennett, and possibly Bagley. The jury's still out on Wiseman.
Maybe even Okafor can't be considered a bust. He had a 6 year career.

Nah he's definitely a bust lol