This is a terrible draft

[Gant]

Let us not forget...

There will be a few good players coming into the league this year, but VERY few; and even fewer who will have an immediate impact. People rightly get very excited leading up to the draft but overall this is a dreadfully bad one.

There is no one worth trading Rondo for. Not even close.

I don't mind the Celtics trading or buying in, but the cost should be next to nothing because that, most likely, is what the return will be.

[DorfonCeltics]

I'm not so sure I agree with you on this one Gant. It might not be a great draft for immediate production but I see a lot of potential talent here. Outside of Griffin and Rubio there's Harden, Thabeet, Evans, Flynn, Curry, and Hill; all who I see being potential starters in the NBA. It may take a few years but after all is said and done, I think this will be considered a pretty good draft class.

[jfs1000d]

It's a terrible draft up high. THere are plenty of shooting guards and bench players available. It's a question of value. No way would I want the 2-10 picks if I was a team that was trying to make the playoffs. But, for a team like Boston and othet contenders, they could trade into the lottery and get themselves a terrific player that may develop.

This draft lacks impact players. But with Thabeet, Brandon Jennings, Rubio and Jordan Hill as well as James Harden...one of those is going to hit it big, VERY BIG. We just don't know which one.

That makes the top of the draft terrible.

Lots of rotation players available after the 10th pick.

IMO, GMs hate this draft because after Blake Griffin, the next top prospect is Thabeet and then a spanish point guard who has a suspect outside shot.

Thabeet will either make you a HOF or get you fired. No GM wants that kind of uncertainty in their draft pick.

[UGA Hayes]

Blah, I'm with Gant, terrible draft. Only guys I like are Griffen, Harden, Lawson, Green, and maybe Rubio. Usually I'm lukewarm about the lottery guys I don't love, but in this case I flat out don't like many of their games at all.

[Gant]

I'm not so sure I agree with you on this one Gant. It might not be a great draft for immediate production but I see a lot of potential talent here. Outside of Griffin and Rubio there's Harden, Thabeet, Evans, Flynn, Curry, and Hill; all who I see being potential starters in the NBA. It may take a few years but after all is said and done, I think this will be considered a pretty good draft class.

There's always some hidden gems and if Danny thinks he knows of one, he's likely right. But overall the D-league should be bursting next season with first rounders.

[BakersDozen]

im wondering where Bill Walker/Giddens would go in this draft... is it too crazy to think Walker would be a lotto pick in this draft?

[sully00]

You have to be extreme cautious in labeling a draft terrible. This reminds me of the 2005 draft, it isn't that there is a lack of talent, it is just a flat draft as the '05 draft turned out to be. You had a very good but not great center at #1 and busted up lottery after that that was all over the map, at the same time Marcin Gortat, who is going to be a starting caliber center, is there at 57. You got a franchise player at 17. a star at 30, and a second round filled with NBA starters including an all star caliber guard at 40.

This is a pg heavy draft and that sucks because it is just a brutal position to project, and it can make a bad team good so the position is overvalued. Just because it makes a bad team good it doesn't usually translate into making a good team great. Make a list of the best pure pgs in history and then count the titles. The hybrid guys like Magic and Isiah have a lot more rings than Nash and Stockton, and more importantly than that Avery Johnson and B.J. Armstrong have more rings than Stockton and Nash. History is always bound to repeat itself.

The talent is in this draft it is just which puddle of goo is going to be a top 10 player. Griffin is going to be good and Thabeet probably isn't going to get you fired. After that I think teams would be better going to extremes than trying to find the middle ground. I would stick with Tyreke Evans, and Earl Clark and avoid the Rubio's and Harden's. Don't overvalue guys from UNC because they won a title, and at the same time when in doubt take the shooter.

[LongTimeFan]

Then this should be a great draft for us. I think in 2005 DA was still learning his craft. Green falling came as a bit of a shock to him, and he really hadn't scouted him. Plus with money being so tight, our cash should allow us to move when the sleepers appear.

I'd love to see our board before the draft just once.

[Zin5]

This looks like a below average draft. It looks like a deeper version than the 2006 draft, in a sense that there's some great or solid players that could be taken from it at the top (Roy, Aldridge, Thomas, Bargnani, Foye; Griffin, Harden, Thabeet, Hill, Rubio) and then some sleepers later on (like Rondo).

[7seventynine9]

This draft would look worse on paper than the 2000 draft if it wasnt for Griffin. The fact their are rumors about Perkins and Rondo being traded for the 2nd pick is all the proof you need of that. I cant imagine any draft in recent history where those 2 could be moved for a 2nd overall.

Of course just because it looks bad on paper doesnt mean there wont be a Michael Redd surprise or two.

[AlCelticFan]

I feel like 3 out of 4 drafts people say it is a weak draft. I'm starting to think it is just some aspect of the shadow-side of human nature or something. So I take it with a grain of salt.

[sully00]

This draft would look worse on paper than the 2000 draft if it wasnt for Griffin. The fact their are rumors about Perkins and Rondo being traded for the 2nd pick is all the proof you need of that. I cant imagine any draft in recent history where those 2 could be moved for a 2nd overall.

Of course just because it looks bad on paper doesnt mean there wont be a Michael Redd surprise or two.

If we offered Rondo and Perk we would already have the 2nd pick. They offered Perk and Bill Walker.

[7seventynine9]

This draft would look worse on paper than the 2000 draft if it wasnt for Griffin. The fact their are rumors about Perkins and Rondo being traded for the 2nd pick is all the proof you need of that. I cant imagine any draft in recent history where those 2 could be moved for a 2nd overall.

Of course just because it looks bad on paper doesnt mean there wont be a Michael Redd surprise or two.

If we offered Rondo and Perk we would already have the 2nd pick. They offered Perk and Bill Walker.

I didnt mean together. There was also the Rondo for 2nd pick rumor out there, alongside the Perkins+Walker deal. My fault for not being clear enough.

[Zin5]

I feel like 3 out of 4 drafts people say it is a weak draft. I'm starting to think it is just some aspect of the shadow-side of human nature or something. So I take it with a grain of salt.

2007 and 2008 were both pre-considered good drafts, 2008 met that and 2007's been a bit of a disappointment.

2006 was pre-considered a bad draft, for the most part it was true.

2004 and 2005 were both pre-considered average drafts, 2004 was probably better than most expected.

2003 was pre-considered a good draft and obviously was.

Can't remember the hype heading into 2002 and before then (remember hearing about how heralded Yao was though), but that's 3/6 considered good, 2/6 considered average, 1/6 considered bad, and most came true, at least from my perspective.

[AlCelticFan]

Hehe. Maybe it's just my bad memory??

[7seventynine9]

[quote="AlCelticFan"]Hehe. Maybe it's just my bad memory??[/quote]


Or just the recent history of the draft. Theres been quite a few weak ones the past 10 years.

[Gant]

I just saw an interview with Marc Spears of the Globe who basically said the same thing- that this was a very weak draft.

He also quoted Danny Ainge as saying Pruitt, Giddens and Walker were better than anyone outside the lottery.

And he said the Rondo trade rumors were absurd.