Busts picked top-5 in the draft

[Eagle4]

Semi side note but who was Tristan Thompson even supposed to be to turn into comparison-wise? Bennett for sure was a bust but was TT supposed to be far better than he actually turned out to be?
Also that 2nd pick is kinda cursed.

[cupcakesnake]

2014 (Andrew Wiggins) wasn't a Wolves pick or a draft night trade. The Cavs drafted him, then Lebron James signed in free agency, and then forced the Kevin Love trade.

Maybe we would still have drafted Wiggins (he was considered the safe bet in light of Embiid's injury) but I have no idea.

Wiggins was one of the top 5 most hyped prospects since LeBron, he was a consensus #1 pick. That certainly played a factor in the Wolves being willing to trade Love for him. There were much higher hopes for Wiggins at the time, which is why he's still considered a draft bust even though he eventually turned out to be a good high level role player when put in a good situation.

Sure. I didn't say Wiggins was a bust. How many people were more disappointed in Wiggins than me? I'm a Canadian AND a Wolves fan lol.

Wiggins was indeed intensely hyped, but his stock dropped during an underwhelming season at Kansas. Most people at the time felt Embiid was the best talent, but he was medically red flagged just enough to drop a bit. Jabari Parker was the only other prospect considered at #1. He'd had a better college season than Wiggins, but people had more legitimate concerns with his defense and conditioning.

So yeah, I think the Wolves, had they had the #1 pick, I'm guessing the draft Wiggins. I just can't say for sure. I don't think we traded Love for him because we were super stoked to get Wiggins though. The Love trade was a trade demand, and we tried to get the best package back we could. It felt like an awesome package at the time. The last two #1 picks? What star has ever brought back a package like that? But looking back at trade grade articles, lots of people felt Wiggins would never be as good as Love. People were still talking about Love like he was a top 5 player back then (even though he never was).

I was very excited about it at the time. The 2015 season was maybe the most hyped I've ever been for the Wolves. It felt like the beginning of a special era.

[HotelVitale]

If you go and sort players by minutes per game and keep only the ones that are rotation players (ie they average something like 20 mins or so) and look where they have been drafted. You'll find that most lottery picks are not even rotation players within a 10 year span from their draft year.

Drafting is an extremely unreliable way to rebuild, you can tank for years and years and have little to nothing to show for it. But to be fair the alternatives are also very difficult, basically you have to fleece somebody in a trade.

Yup last part is true. But I'd slant it the other way: only super luck lets you be a contender without a fairly lengthy rebuild (like 3 or more years), and rebuilding is generally the best (and often only) option to get your way towards contending despite how tough draft odds are. Nothing's close to guaranteed but the rebuild odds are a lot better than the odds for the 'wait around for the perfect late draft pick or random other luck' option.

[HotelVitale]

Semi side note but who was Tristan Thompson even supposed to be to turn into comparison-wise? Bennett for sure was a bust but was TT supposed to be far better than he actually turned out to be? Also that 2nd pick is kinda cursed.

Kinda complicated answer. Even when it's obvious what prospects are good at nobody knows how good they'll be at those things in the NBA. E.g. literally no one could've told you if Klay Thompson or Nik Stauskas would be better at shooting 3s in the NBA, and no one could tell you if Jayson Tatum would be better at midrange scoring and driving off it than Jabari Parker. Good draft picks tend to have those obvious major skills translate really well and then also adapt and learn other ways to be effective. They still usually base their game in the things that made them great prospects (with some exceptions like Kawhi), but then they develop a million small mental and physical skills to supplement that stuff into a well-rounded/dynamic NBA game.

In the case of TT, people liked him at draft time because he had the body and basic skillset to be a dominant force, but in the NBA he was good at only the most basic things that people expected: offensive rebounding and mobility/flexibility at the 4-5 spot. So his most obvious skills translates pretty well, but he didn't pick up much along the way, both in terms of IQ/mastery of the game and the side skills that would make his game more dynamic. If he developed nice defensive awareness his athleticism could've allowed him to be excellent on defense, or if he developed a vaguely passable 15 footer or learned to take two dribbles and finish (or see the court like at all) he could've unlocked a lot more offensive upside.

Overall he wasn't a total bust whose basic strengths didn't translate into a NBA role (like a LOT of lotto busts) but the fact that he was really only good at those things and pretty bad at almost everything else greatly limited his upside and prevented him from being more than a meh rotation guy. So yes he was very disappointing for people banking on his upside, but not a bad choice if you're just looking at average draft outcome.

[Pachinko_]

If you go and sort players by minutes per game and keep only the ones that are rotation players (ie they average something like 20 mins or so) and look where they have been drafted. You'll find that most lottery picks are not even rotation players within a 10 year span from their draft year.

Drafting is an extremely unreliable way to rebuild, you can tank for years and years and have little to nothing to show for it. But to be fair the alternatives are also very difficult, basically you have to fleece somebody in a trade.

Yup last part is true. But I'd slant it the other way: only super luck lets you be a contender without a fairly lengthy rebuild (like 3 or more years), and rebuilding is generally the best (and often only) option to get your way towards contending despite how tough draft odds are. Nothing's close to guaranteed but the rebuild odds are a lot better than the odds for the 'wait around for the perfect late draft pick or random other luck' option.

Well, look, mathematically you gonna wait 29 years before you win a title. And about 15 of those years you gonna be crap. That's just how a 30 team league work, and the sooner you accept those numbers the better, and then you will realise you have A LOT of time to work on your team.

The trick is you have to sell something in the meantime to keep the people coming and buying tickets, and the best and easiest thing to sell is hope. Call your tanking the "youth movement" or something silly like that and people will usually bite. From this marketing point of view, I understand tanking. From the point of trying to beat the odds and cheat the system, I don't. You want to improve your odds? Just be better than the competition at everything. Be better at drafting, coaching, developing, trading, and everything else.

[LibertyPrime]

WIggins is not a bust.

The Wolves traded him for D'Angelo Russell and had to pay a first for the privilege.

Bust.

Absurd logic, to blame the player for the sins of the front office.

ROTY, All-Star, NBA Champion. Not a bust.

[TimberKat]

Interesting analysis. I think the method/stats need some change. In general, there is a busts in the top 3 picks every year. GMs seems to always find a Darko or luck out of a Len Bias. Just did some spot check of the 90s and I think we need some tinkering with the method:

1998 – LaFrentz at #3 is bust
1997 – Daniels at #4 is bust
1996 – Camby at #2 is a bust if Wiggins is
1994 – Marshall at #4? Another Wolves draft
1993 – Shawn Bradley at #2? How can he not on any bust list? Never avg a double/double season the entire career?
1992 – all 5 are great to good players: O’Neal, Mourning, Laettner, Jim Jackson (not bust), LaPhonso Ellis (not bust)
1991 – Billy Owens at #3 is borderline for me.
1990 – Abdul-Rauf at #3 is a bust and Gill at #5 is not, is questionable.

[SomeBunghole]

How is Darrell Griffith. the consensus college player of the year who had a solid 10 year NBA career with 37 playoff game appearances, a bust (#2, 1980)?

He was the second pick of the draft and by the time Stockton and Malone got good, he was only 29 and the Jazz were starting Bobby Hansen over him. Is this what you expect of a #2 pick?

[SomeBunghole]

Semi side note but who was Tristan Thompson even supposed to be to turn into comparison-wise? Bennett for sure was a bust but was TT supposed to be far better than he actually turned out to be?

NBADraft.net had a weird comparison for him: Charles Smith. Not only is Smith one of the busts in the chart I made(3rd pick in '88), he's sort of an odd player to compare someone to almost 20 years after he retired. Here's a good article from the time Thompson was drafted: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/752048-cleveland-cavaliers-draft-pick-tristan-thompson-could-surprise-doubters

I really like this quote from it: "That all makes it sound like he'll be a nice role player, but not exactly what you'd expect from a top four pick."

That's a point I made earlier in the thread. Yes, Thompson was a serviceable center, but at #4, you're not looking to draft a serviceable player. You're trying to draft a stud. If there are no likely studs on the board when you pick and you badly need a serviceable center, you package that pick(possibly with some other pieces) for that serviceable center.

Modern NBA values draft picks highly, and especially high picks. That's why you see so many protections on picks when they get traded. You can't tell me there was no package where the Cavs could've gotten an ultimately better player than Thompson by trading that pick.

[SomeBunghole]

Interesting analysis. I think the method/stats need some change. In general, there is a busts in the top 3 picks every year. GMs seems to always find a Darko or luck out of a Len Bias. Just did some spot check of the 90s and I think we need some tinkering with the method.

Right. As I said, BPM is one of the many ways we could do this kind of analysis and one of the problems is that most of the players you listed are borderline cases(both in the sense of busts and studs). Gill was 0.1 for his career and Abdul-Rauf was -0.8 but also hurt by a quick dropoff and bad seasons at the beginning and the end of his career. Gill also benefits from BPM punishing below average defenders severely. Daniels is at exactly 0.0 and LaFrentz at 0.7

Bradley is a mistake. He finished at -0.2 so he should be a bust in the table.

Camby is a complicated case. BPM aside, I ask myself if he was a bust or not. Remember that this was around the time where it was widely accepted that you could build a franchise around a defensive-minded center, and that perhaps you should build a franchise around that kind of a center if given a chance. Camby was a DPOY and made several All-Defense teams. He also lead the league in blocks 4 times, and back in those days of non-shooters and teams packing the paint, blocks were much more valuable than today. Camby's legacy is probably hurt by the lack of team success, as he never made it past the first round of playoffs in his last 13 years in the league. So I don't know. He didn't have a great career, but was he a bust?

As mentioned, BPM loves him because he was an elite defender in the days of low-scoring ball. He is not a borderline case at all, he's at 2.3 for his career. That's a little bit higher than say, Peja from the same draft.

[zero rings]

WIggins is not a bust.

The Wolves traded him for D'Angelo Russell and had to pay a first for the privilege.

Bust.

Absurd logic, to blame the player for the sins of the front office.

ROTY, All-Star, NBA Champion. Not a bust.

He’s salvaged his career and become a decent role player. When you’re the #1 overall pick and that’s all you are, you’re a bust.

Nobody cares about his phony All-Star selection.

[greekman]

WIggins is not a bust.

The Wolves traded him for D'Angelo Russell and had to pay a first for the privilege.

Bust.

d'angelo wasn't a bust either

[greekman]

The Wolves traded him for D'Angelo Russell and had to pay a first for the privilege.

Bust.

Absurd logic, to blame the player for the sins of the front office.

ROTY, All-Star, NBA Champion. Not a bust.

He’s salvaged his career and become a decent role player. When you’re the #1 overall pick and that’s all you are, you’re a bust.

Nobody cares about his phony All-Star selection.

he's way more than a decent role player

[Ice Trae]

Good god this whole time I thought Tristan Thompson was picked around 15-18

[Harry Garris]

In my opinion a guy drafted between 2-5 who had a decent career as a role player and played a part of a championship team is not a bust. Even if his advanced stats are slightly below average.

[Adelheid]

Wiggins managed to salvage his nba career and found his niche with GSW, but that trajectory is not what everybody expects from a 1st pick

[zero rings]

Absurd logic, to blame the player for the sins of the front office.

ROTY, All-Star, NBA Champion. Not a bust.

He’s salvaged his career and become a decent role player. When you’re the #1 overall pick and that’s all you are, you’re a bust.

Nobody cares about his phony All-Star selection.

he's way more than a decent role player

Is he really? His offense is below average and he still shoots too much. Poor passer and rebounder. His best attribute is being a 6'8 athlete you can throw at star wings and not get embarrassed on D. Which is fine, but not good enough when you're the top prospect in the nation and the #1 overall pick.

If Wiggins were still on the Wolves would this even be a debate? He's getting the Curry bump in efficiency and he still isn't even that good.

[CobraCommander]

Wiggins is not a bust...wow people are weird - dude is a major contributor on a championship team. Played great defense in that playoff run too. Was the primary player in Minny but minny has been like a death trap to careers and it doesn’t make sense.

The hate is is weird


Also you think you slick -
the comment that that the top two players from the 96 draft ain’t in top 5 is slick but not true...AI is second to Kobe in that draft - Nash a monster but AI is better


I like this thread...well done thank you for your service

[SomeBunghole]

Ask yourselves this. If your team had the first pick in the draft and a decade later the player picked had the career of Wiggins, would you be disappointed?

[zero rings]

In my opinion a guy drafted between 2-5 who had a decent career as a role player and played a part of a championship team is not a bust. Even if his advanced stats are slightly below average.

Being a bust is all about where you are drafted. We don't call failed second rounders busts for a reason.

Markelle Fultz may stick around the NBA for 15 years but he'll still be a bust because of where he was drafted and the guys who were taken after him.