Busts picked top-5 in the draft

[bisme37]

Personally, I don’t like labeling players who got injured as a bust. I get it, they didn’t live up to expectations, but it was out of their control.

Not like players want to get injured. Just unfortunate more than anything.

Agreed. Injuries are usually a big part of it. And the term bust is just so rude lol.

And in cases where the player's career isn't derailed by injury, it's the team's fault for drafting him too high, not the player. What is the player supposed to say "no don't draft me in the lottery I'm not that good!"

We need an insulting term for the team that messed up more than picking on the player imo.

[JeffReal]

Guys. He's using an objective measure for busts.

No, he isn’t. He made a personal, subjective decision about what he wanted to use. His measure is both subjective and arbitrary.

An “objective” measure would certainly require the input of more than one person before it’s adopted. Just because something is statistical that doesn’t make it objective. People use selective statistics for their own personal reasons all the time.

Don’t confuse statistical with objective. Two different things.

It might be interesting to ask, what stats could you point to, to call a top-five pick a bust?

[JeffReal]

…

We need an insulting term for the team that messed up more than picking on the player imo.

Calling the team “morons” is good enough for me. Lol

[Jadoogar]

Guys. He's using an objective measure for busts.

No, he isn’t. He made a personal, subjective decision about what he wanted to use. His measure is both subjective and arbitrary.

An “objective” measure would certainly require the input of more than one person before it’s adopted. Just because something is statistical that doesn’t make it objective. People use selective statistics for their own personal reasons all the time.

Don’t confuse statistical with objective. Two different things.

It might be interesting to ask, what stats could you point to, to call a top-five pick a bust?

No all-in-one stat is going to be perfect. He picked one and explained his choice at the beginning. If you want to do this same analysis with a different metric, go for it.

The whole point of the post was to showcase that most draft picks, even top 5, aren't that impactful. You can quibble with Wiggins being a bust or not but that''s not what the post was about.

[SomeBunghole]

The whole point of the post was to showcase that most draft picks, even top 5, aren't that impactful. You can quibble with Wiggins being a bust or not but that''s not what the post was about.

I think that's not even what we're quibbling about here. I think everyone so far has agreed that Wiggins has been a disappointment. The quibbles are over how big a disappointment he's been and whether the word bust applies. Which is really more about what the definition of bust is to different posters.

A poster above broke down how he feels the last 20 #1 picks turned out and divided them into 3 categories. We may question whether injuries count(as some other posters have already brought up) or whether Simmons is at this point more a bust than mediocre, and I'm sure there's Raptors fans who'd say that Bargnani was a bust through and through, but those are details. I don't think we'd argue much over who's in his "successful" category and who's not.

[jazzfan1971]

Is the measure he chose not objective??

[SportsGuru08]

Michael Olowokandi was probably the bust of all busts, even moreso than Kwame Brown.