Schlenk: 2018 was top heavy, 2019 is a deep draft

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Maaan...you are a wordy fella.

Yep.

[Buzzard]

What remains confusing about your approach is that, on the one hand, you talk about drafting BPA, and on the other, you talk about drafting to obtain an elite talent.... huh?

If you're drafting at #8 for BPA, then it's just that... you don't really care if the player can be projected to be an elite player some day, you're just satisfied that you're getting the player most likely to have the best success.

And lastly... we agree... if there is no potential elite player left at #8... AND... if there is no team that seems ready to make a trade that would allow him to punt to 2020... then he's left to go with BPA, whoever that happens to be. We should also be able to agree... on the basis of your insistence that parallels mine... that that would be a disappointing development... we both seem to perceive that Schlenk is smart to pursue a player for whom a reasonable argument can be made by the scouts that he can evolve into an elite.

And you seem to think that when one is drafting they are not always "hoping" for elite talent and that for every player taken it is already "known" whether they will be elite or just a good starter. I bet every GM wished it was as easy to determine as you make it out to be; but I don't think none of them are not hoping for elite when they draft.

It sounds to me like you are saying: This season I am drafting for a HOF player; and then next year all we want to draft for is a starter. I take BPA and hope for the best. If that sounds overly simplistic to you, I am ok with that.

Now, you're just being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse. Every player is "hoped" to be the next Michael Jordan, but obviously, some of those hopes are better grounded than others.

It's like you don't think scouts grade on the basis of a ceiling or a floor at all. It's like you don't think scouts project... (ie, take an educated guess as to what they might become...) players in order to arrive at their ranking of BPA. It's like you have no exposure to the concept that there are stocks that you can buy where there is great risk, but great potential reward.... and others where there is less risk but great potential reward assuming you have the capital with which to acquire the stock. And that this is like that.

I'm sorry but I thought we were attempting to have a legitimate discussion, but time after time, you refuse to engage the counterpoint made, and either agree or offer some directly applicable counterpoint of your own... instead, you just keep circling back to reaffirm your original assertion, no regard for the counterpoint made at all... that's what people do when they're more interested in holding onto a position rather than having a productive conversation.

That's not to say that people cannot agree to disagree legitimately... obviously, they can... but it's more valid for them to do that when they just arrive at some fork in the road where there really is no further evidence/facts or no further line of rational thought, and it's left for the gut feeling or the general attitude of each to take over. That's not what happened here as far as I can tell.

I think every GM drafts who they think is BPA. They are wrong more times than right. We should feel good that Travis looks to have done very well with Collins and Trae; looks to have done well with Huerter; and then Spellman was injured and out of shape to much to get any kind of bearing on.

Your whole point about black and white; one top five draft pick and you are trying to project the future and direction of not just a player but a entire franchise is ridiculous in no uncertain terms. You project; I think its quite obvious no one else is naive enough to think they are that smart or clairvoyant.

I think out future is brighter now; but given the Hawks have never won a championship in Atlanta, I am not ready to call it a done deal.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

And you seem to think that when one is drafting they are not always "hoping" for elite talent and that for every player taken it is already "known" whether they will be elite or just a good starter. I bet every GM wished it was as easy to determine as you make it out to be; but I don't think none of them are not hoping for elite when they draft.

It sounds to me like you are saying: This season I am drafting for a HOF player; and then next year all we want to draft for is a starter. I take BPA and hope for the best. If that sounds overly simplistic to you, I am ok with that.

Now, you're just being obtuse for the sake of being obtuse. Every player is "hoped" to be the next Michael Jordan, but obviously, some of those hopes are better grounded than others.

It's like you don't think scouts grade on the basis of a ceiling or a floor at all. It's like you don't think scouts project... (ie, take an educated guess as to what they might become...) players in order to arrive at their ranking of BPA. It's like you have no exposure to the concept that there are stocks that you can buy where there is great risk, but great potential reward.... and others where there is less risk but great potential reward assuming you have the capital with which to acquire the stock. And that this is like that.

I'm sorry but I thought we were attempting to have a legitimate discussion, but time after time, you refuse to engage the counterpoint made, and either agree or offer some directly applicable counterpoint of your own... instead, you just keep circling back to reaffirm your original assertion, no regard for the counterpoint made at all... that's what people do when they're more interested in holding onto a position rather than having a productive conversation.

That's not to say that people cannot agree to disagree legitimately... obviously, they can... but it's more valid for them to do that when they just arrive at some fork in the road where there really is no further evidence/facts or no further line of rational thought, and it's left for the gut feeling or the general attitude of each to take over. That's not what happened here as far as I can tell.

I think every GM drafts who they think is BPA. They are wrong more times than right. We should feel good that Travis looks to have done very well with Collins and Trae; looks to have done well with Huerter; and then Spellman was injured and out of shape to much to get any kind of bearing on.

Your whole point about black and white; one top five draft pick and you are trying to project the future and direction of not just a player but a entire franchise is ridiculous in no uncertain terms. You project; I think its quite obvious no one else is naive enough to think they are that smart or clairvoyant.

I think out future is brighter now; but given the Hawks have never won a championship in Atlanta, I am not ready to call it a done deal.

Was there a counterpoint in there? I didn't see one. More rehash as far as I could figure.

My last word: Sometimes GMs take the BPA. I've acknowledged that. Sometimes, though, if not often, they take the BPA at a certain position. And sometimes they take the highest-reward player because they perceive a need to hit a home run, and not play it the safe way with the next guy on their board.

That's not the truth because I said it, it's the truth because that's seen in the history of this league.

Done... you're welcome to your own last word if you choose, or not.

[Buzzard]

Back on topic:
I like that Schlenk does not care about what the media thinks. I also like that he has shown a good ability to get players who can contribute from day one.

GSW was the same way with Curry, Klay, Barnes, and Draymond. Whomever we draft, whether the media sees them as a project or not, I think they will come in and contribute this season.