When I saw that I'd be picking 4th, my first thought was Hakeem Olajuwon. He's a guy I'd love to build around and has a good case for being a Top 4 Post-Merger player, and someone I thought would likely be available at that spot.
Then I saw the first pick was Tim Duncan, and I started seriously thinking about Kevin Garnett, who folks might know, I rank higher than Duncan and I'd love to make a team to show what could be done with him. But when I really thought about the FGA limit that was shaping all of this, it just felt like this was the perfect setting to try to build around...
1. Steve Nash, '04-05, 11.4 FGA
I mean, I do believe he's an Offensive GOAT candidate, and he shot the ball way less than any of the others. A team just has to pick him, don't they? Well then, it should be me. No one's argued more for Nash than me. The very first post I made on this site was to defend Nash from doubters during the '04-05 season.
How fitting for me to pick him, and pick that season? Serious catharsis potential there.
Okay then, what do I need to consider if I'm building around Nash?
1. As many 3-point shooters as possible.
2. Every teammate has to be good at defense.
3. In particular, i'm going to need strong perimeter defenders, particularly those known for man defense, who can take the hard match-ups and at times switch adroitly.
In my head, I started thinking of players Nash played with, and thought about how to "round them up" if possible.
While Amar'e Stoudemire wasn't Nash's most valuable Sun teammate (Shawn Marion), that was because of his defensive weakness. The dream would be to find a big man quick enough and smart enough to run the break and a killer pick & roll, but who was also a defensive anchor...oh and really would be great if he had 3-point range too.
2. Joel Embiid, '18-19, 18.7 FGA
Embiid immediately came to mind. I thought through the list of all-time great 5's, and by and large it just wasn't all that clear you could expect them to be able to shoot the 3 (from prior experience, I've found people are skeptical that older guys could learn to hit the 3, so I decided not to risk it this time).
So did Anthony Davis, and my choice was between those two - I couldn't see passing up either of them for a player at a different position. The funny thing there is that coming out of Kentucky I was over-the-moon high on Davis and was always in the Davis > Embiid camp, and to this day I'd still build a franchise around Davis over Embiid because of injury concerns.
But I just think Embiid is better able to impact games than Davis. I haven't seen a big impact the game so easily since Shaq, and that Shaq comparison has come to mind to me a lot with Embiid. He ain't Shaq, but he's the most talented 5 since Shaq, and he can also shoot from range and run the break.
I seriously think, in fact, that things could easily be different right now in the perception of Embiid if Simmons were just a slightly competent shooter. I think that if Philly could really use space around Embiid, that makes them enough better Toronto doesn't beat them, and from there it's entirely possible they are on their way to the title.
Also, there's the reality that Davis likes to play 4 (unwisely), and that in this league he'd need to play 4. A 5 with everything I need is going to be harder to get than a 4.
After getting Embiid, now I could more clearly consider the 3rd and 4th picks that would come close together. My top priority was getting the best backcourt mate to help Nash thrive on both sides of the ball. A super-Raja Bell, in other words.
The first two guys to come to mind were Steph Curry's teammates, Klay Thompson and Andre Iguodala. There was a sense of safety I felt when picking the guys who protect Curry. Neither was quite what I wanted. I wasn't looking to have my off-guard to be as much of a focus as Thompson's FGA would demand, and Thompson's defense while good, isn't the best of the best. With Iguodala, the shooting concerned me. I didn't want to have a 2 that the opponent was even tempted to cheat away from.
I went and looked up bkref's list of All-Defensive team guys, and found myself with a short list of Bruce Bowen, Doug Christie and
3. Michael Cooper, '86-87, 9.0 FGA
All 3 guys fit the description of 3 & D. Bowen, of course was the guy first associated with 3 & D, and Christie was a contemporary of his. Michael Cooper on the other hand came way back before on the Showtime Lakers in the '80s.
Now, you should understand that my relationship with Laker fandom is complicated. I spend more time at odds with the Laker fans around them than really being on the same page...but my feelings about the Showtime Lakers are entirely positive. I grew up in LA during the bulk of that run and the names of some of these guys felt like Uncles. A chance to draft Uncle Coop on my team? Man that would be nice. Is that the smart move?
I concluded it was. Looking back at past players trying to identify guys who could be stars today but weren't back then, he has everything you'd look for. He was THE 3-point guy for the Lakers, his defense was so good he won DPOY, he was incredible on fast breaks and slammed breath-taking dunks, and eventually he was operating as the 2nd point guard and - get this - casually taking and hitting 3's off the dribble. He was well-liked and made people smile, he would go on to coach, and he felt like he was just destined to be a fan favorite.
Another note about his 3-point shooting: His volume is low by today's standards, but it was right at the top of the league back then. His percentage is respectable by today's standards, but this is something he'd get better at if he were allowed to really make it a focus like it would be today, and I'd note that he was an excellent free throw shooter.
Another note about his defense: Coop's arms have been described as "spidery" because they are so long. I've never seen their actual measurements, but we know today how advantageous such arms can be. This is someone who would absolutely be able to both man guard his guy hard, and rush over to challenge shots from other guys.
Anyway, I believe that Coop is quite possibly the best guy in NBA history to protect an offensive star like Magic or Nash, and I didn't want to settle for 2nd best here.
With my 4th pick, I knew I'd take either a 3 or a 4, but I found myself feeling like the 4 was the higher priority because it would be hard to find guys who could shoot the 3 and play defense there. I'll acknowledge up front that if I had decided on a 3, the top two on my list were Iguodala (who works as either a 2 or a 3 for me) or Shane Battier (who I'm more comfortable with as a 3), and both got picked before I would have had the chance.
My short list of 4's was Paul Millsap, Chris Bosh, and
4. Rasheed Wallace, '05-06, 13.3 FGA
I'm a big Millsap fan, but he would have been my last resort here. Partly because I just don't think others are all that effectively swayed that he's as effective as I think he is, and partly because I've had him on a team before, and I'd rather not have the same players each time if I can help it.
(I am bummed no one took Millsap though. Oh well.)
Bosh was a good option, no doubt about it. He could do everything I wanted. But I think Sheed was better.
My feelings on Sheed have taken something of a 180. I saw him as a talented underachiever until he came to the Pistons. In Detroit it became clear that mostly he needed leadership from someone other than himself that he respected. He got that from Ben Wallace and the rest of the Piston core.
Something that I didn't realize until we got enough +/- data, was that Sheed was like a mini-Shaq impact-wise. Both were guys who you'd swear should have inevitable on-court consequences to the malaise that they carried with them through the season, and yet bother guys were reliably helping their to a remarkable degree (Shaq more than Sheed of course).
This has caused me to really think of Sheed as essentially the best possible non-superstar in terms of what he achieved for his teammates on the court, but he just couldn't handle expectations beyond that. But that's just fine, I don't need him to.
One other thing: Sheed's ability to play the rangier defensive 4 to Ben's classic interior anchor means he ought to be able to fit well with someone like Embiid. Can't assume that about very many strong defensive 4's.
As I considered my 5th & 6th picks, I found myself tempted to grab another 3 & D big or backcourt guy, but had to acknowledge that I wasn't just missing my starting 3, there was a gap on my team without anyone in a certain size range that also happened to be just about the most in demand size range in the game right now (6'6" to 6'8"). While Coop had the length to play that role and was a fierce defender, I really wanted a guy a bit bigger than him with extreme athleticism.
I found myself fixated on
5. OG Anunoby, '19-20, 8.4 FGA
Here you had a guy with the agility of a 3, the mass of a 4, and the reach of a 5. He could shoot the 3 too.
I also have been a bit fascinating watching what happens in the vacuum that Kawhi left in Toronto. While Pascal Siakam took on the alpha scoring load, OG was the guy who took on more of a defensive focus, and the Raptors this year had an even more elite defense than last year with OG being the guy getting praised as the defensive MVP.
Now, OG is young. The youngest on my team by 2 years, but quite frankly, while OG is a physical marvel, he's not an outlier the way Embiid is. Embiid seems like he can just walk out onto the court and dominate, OG is a guy who is going to get more valuable as he figures more things out fitting in where there are gaps.
But on a team with experienced and smart, OG can be allowed to really specialize to add punch.
Also: I think Michael Cooper would be a great role model for him.
Had he not been available, I was also considering Robert Covington as well as the guy I picked 6th
6. Brook Lopez, '18-19, 9.7 FGA
When I was thinking about Embiid vs AD, Brook also came to mind. He wasn't someone I'd have considered picking over those guys, but I had been fascinated by what I saw from Brook in Milwaukee. This is a guy who had always been seen as more of a classic volume scoring big with his skill, touch, and intelligence, but who now was cast in a 3 & D role and it was working amazingly to the point where people were seriously talking about him this year as a DPOY candidate (for the record, I side with Giannis there). In doing so, he made himself perfect for my team and the question was really just when it made sense to draft him.
When Marc Gasol went in the 5th, I had a feeling of panic that I couldn't wait any longer with him, but I really wanted OG. I decided to risk waiting until the 6th round to get Brook and it worked out.
Before I move on, a shout out to Jack Sikma who was not drafted. Had I not been worried that people wouldn't respect him or his shooting ability enough (didn't shoot 3's until late in his career), I may well have picked Sikma instead of Brook.
Moving on to the last two picks, I had actually been thinking about the backup point guard role since I drafted Sheed 4th. I wanted the right fit and cared enough about it that I considered drafting a 1 in with my 5th pick before I did my research and came away feeling like I had several options, which I'll go into below. Sufficed to say, I decided I could wait until the final pick for the backup point guard if I could get someone who gave me a lot of "bang for the buck" FGA-wise.
7. Raja Bell, '02-03, 2.8 FGA
Raja came to mind for obvious reasons. Known to be an amazing fit with Nash and someone who relished finding a way to add value as a role player. But from an All-Time League perspective, he just wasn't celebrated enough for me to seriously consider him when I was shopping for a starting 2, and I really wanted someone who didn't take as many shots as I thought of Raja taking.
But then I started thinking about pre-Phoenix Raja, because the impression he made on me when he was in Dallas/Utah was really the same type of thing I saw in Phoenix, it's just that in Phoenix we all saw "Oh, he definitely needs to be a starter." I thought a lot about it and researched his history in more depth than I'd done before. I really came away with the conclusions that he could have been doing the Phoenix stuff earlier.
Yes, he learned a thing or two with each year he aged, but he was 29 when he came to Phoenix, and he'd been playing 3 & D ball for many years before that. I find it to be a bit absurd to think he was "too raw" at age 26, he didn't come to us from Pluto, he won Freshman of the Year in his conference before a fallout with the coach disrupted him - and based on his later career path, by and large he wasn't a trouble maker. In his own words, the key to his success earning his way to the NBA was being a good attitude guy who worked harder than everyone else. I'm sure he learned something from the college coaching experience and became more mature, but some college coaches are just nutcases.
And once I started getting behind the idea of picking his Dallas season, the catharsis started kicking in and I realized I desperately wanted Raja on my team, and probably should have drafted him sooner. But I got lucky, he was still available, and that meant I really had some great options for my final pick.
Incidentally, if Raja didn't work out, Wesley Matthews was on my mind.
Point guards I was considering: Marcus Smart, Don Buse, George Hill and
8. Ricky Rubio, '19-20, 10.7 FGA
I love Smart, and would have been thrilled to pick him with the 8th spot. He had everything I needed including the ability to play off-ball and guard effectively.
Buse is from before my time and I expect most wouldn't know a lot about him. He'd work perfectly as the backup point guard, and could transition offensively to off-ball easily, but his defensive acclaim was mostly about steals. That's fine when he's my 1, but I don't need Nash's backcourt mate to be more focused on steals than than man defense.
George Hill blossomed this year in an All-Time League friendly way, but while his defense was respectable, it was never an outlier even before he entered his 30s.
The debate was between Smart and Rubio. Neither is a great shooter, but both have practiced the 3 to the point where they are quite solid on that front. Rubio's a great defender, but I'd give Smart the edge there. But while I'll praise Smart's passing, the reality is that he hasn't been spending years honing genius-level floor generalship. For a backup point guard, he's awesome, but in Rubio I had the chance to make the best guard passer since Nash - someone who regularly gets talked about as a creative genius - the guy who I slotted in whenever Nash went to the bench.
It was just too perfect. Once I really thought about Rubio, I had to pick him over Smart (though I never got the chance since Smart got drafted before my pick anyway).
Total FGA: 84.0/85
