Can the argument be made?

[ComboGuardCity]

On that list:

1 super star in curry
2 fringe all stars in Randle and Deng
3 all star potential/injury cost them a lot in Murray, Lauri, and Eric Gordon

Essentially if you get a guy with the 7th pick, you’re looking at an all star 15% of the time. An average starter isn’t a home run but it’s also not a bad pick.

[The Number 9]

I can't imagine Hayes, Stewart or Bey being super important players on the Celtics, Bucks, Nets.

They are in their 3rd year. Who are the important players of this draft class or younger on those teams ?
Let's be reasonable, they're not contender caliber player yet, maybe they'll never be. But it's rare to get a player who will be a major player in the league and in contending teams in his first years, and usually not with the 7th, 16th or 19th pick.

[edmunder_prc]

I can't imagine Hayes, Stewart or Bey being super important players on the Celtics, Bucks, Nets.

They are in their 3rd year. Who are the important players of this draft class or younger on those teams ?
Let's be reasonable, they're not contender caliber player yet, maybe they'll never be. But it's rare to get a player who will be a major player in the league and in contending teams in his first years, and usually not with the 7th, 16th or 19th pick.

Pistons went all in on that draft and the results are blah. Hayes, Bey and Stewart are all clunky parts. A PG that still doesnt have a great right hand and has trouble scoring (other than the last 10 games). A SF that is only good at shooting and won't shoot. A 6'7" PF/C that cant jump?

Tyrese Maxey was pick 21 (76ers are in the playoffs). Weaver missed 3 times. Haliburton was pick 12 (Pacers look great along with Mathurin which might end up way better than Ivey). Quickley on the Knicks was pick 25 - he can play. Desmond Bane was pick 30 and hes better than Bey at that big, slow, strong wing type guy. He is a guy that can start and be part of a playoff team.

I get it - there are 30 picks but Weaver spent 3 picks, sold future picks, traded guys away and took 3 swings and they honestly aren't any good.

For Cade's draft both Barnes and Mobley are on playoff teams and important players.

[Invictus88]

No.

If OP doesn't care to put a complete thought within a thread title then I don't care enough to do the extra legwork to determine what this thread is actually about.

#clickbaittitle

[Snakebites]

Even if Killian Hayes ends up being a decent player we still missed on Haliburton who plays the same position and was a totally justifiable pick at 7 with what was known at the time.

Ricky Rubio turning out to have a decent career didn’t change the fact that he was picked ahead of Steph Curry- to use a more extreme example.

It’s not about comparing him to number 7 picks in totally different drafts. It’s about comparing him to what else we could have gotten.

[Pharaoh]

Even if Killian Hayes ends up being a decent player we still missed on Haliburton who plays the same position and was a totally justifiable pick at 7 with what was known at the time.

Ricky Rubio turning out to have a decent career didn’t change the fact that he was picked ahead of Steph Curry- to use a more extreme example.

It’s not about comparing him to number 7 picks in totally different drafts. It’s about comparing him to what else we could have gotten.

THIS

Have said this for years - just cause every GM misses on certain players doesn't mean we can let our GM slide when they miss a obvious choice.

Haliburton would have been justified same way Booker or Mitchell would have been justified at the time.

Missing on Joker, Giannis or Kawhi is ok cause no one saw them becoming what they did.

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

[Sort]

I remember being surprised we didn't take the safer pick in Haliburton. If memory serves, most people felt delighted we went swinging.

In fairness, luck plays a big role in all this. How well a young man will adjust and thrive (or not) in the NBA is a a hard business. At least we didn't draft Haliburton and then trade him.

[buzzkilloton]

Even if Killian Hayes ends up being a decent player we still missed on Haliburton who plays the same position and was a totally justifiable pick at 7 with what was known at the time.

Ricky Rubio turning out to have a decent career didn’t change the fact that he was picked ahead of Steph Curry- to use a more extreme example.

It’s not about comparing him to number 7 picks in totally different drafts. It’s about comparing him to what else we could have gotten.

THIS

Have said this for years - just cause every GM misses on certain players doesn't mean we can let our GM slide when they miss a obvious choice.

Haliburton would have been justified same way Booker or Mitchell would have been justified at the time.

Missing on Joker, Giannis or Kawhi is ok cause no one saw them becoming what they did.

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

I disagree. Drafting is really hard and its not a exact science. All you can do is make the best decision at the time you make a pick. The results on what player is the best after the draft have so many variables you cant know on draft day. Players develop diff after draft some are immature, some actually still grow height and wingspan, their is team chemistry, diff coaches can reach a certain prospect a diff way, then their is injuries that slow development the list goes on and on.

Also some picks are naturally more risky and more prone to be complete misses. Killian is a boom bust pick his range of outcomes has way more bad outcomes then a safer pick. Of course after the draft everyone can look back and go "Haliburton had a ceiling look at him" well look at where Haliburton fell to in the draft. He hit a top % range of outcome that every team who passed him couldnt see at the time of the pick.

If you have a good process you will in general make good picks but that doesnt mean you take the best pick everytime. Its like this season Ivey is the best prospect but Math and Sharpe arent far behind. If you take the best guy chances are still one of the guys behind him is better(there are 2 somewhat close prospects behind him thats double the players!) but you really cant be certain who it is. You just simply use the information you have take the prospect who has the highest % to be the best but many many times one of the guys behind will be better.

[Moses ShamMoses]

I will admit Weaver hasn't exactly lived up to his top talent evaluator reputation but he's been pretty good overall based on early returns. No big misses at least.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using RealGM mobile app

[Pharaoh]

Think it's actually too early to determine the outcome from Weaver's drafting here.

Less than 3 full seasons of games for Hayes, Bey & Stewart. Even less for Livers & Cade. Less again for Ivey and Duren.



Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM Forums mobile app

[Kalamazoo317]

Weaver hasn't really had any significant misses and also hasn't really had any home runs (i.e. surprising steals at that point in the draft). He's just been consistently solid, which gives us a solid but not spectacular team.