nate33 wrote:pancakes3 wrote:Bunk. Just pure bunk.
Come on yall. Let's approach this logically.
We agree that are differences in players' abilities. We agree that not every player in a particular year's draft pool is equal. And do we agree that there are factors that contribute to how one player is more talented than the next? And I'm assuming we can also agree that evaluating these factors allows us to rank players in the player pool relative to the next?
And that these evaluations are not definitive/predictive, but they are measured, to a degree, based on probability?
But there's some law of nature that prevents us from comparing/evaluating between different years' draft classes?
There ain't no Wemby in this class. There ain't no Lebron in this class. I think that's pretty freaking obvious. So if we can say that, then what's preventing us from evaluating player pools year-to-year?
You can dispute on how confident we can make these determinations, and argue that the differences may not be so affirmative that a 2nd overall translates to a 6th overall for a different year, but the logic dictates that we can be confident to a degree.
And sorry, PIF, me saying "it is probable" or "it is likely" is not predictive.
See, when yall say there is NO WAY, that's factually wrong. If that's true, then the concept of player evaluation is junk science, and that draft order doesn't matter. We can't evaluate anyway, so why bother? Picks are picks. Seeing the imperfections of player evaluation, and then declaring that these imperfections make it impossible to evaluate players is throwing out the analytical baby with the bathwater.
pancakes3 is 100% right here.
If you are arguing that the strength of the draft class relative to other draft classes is totally unknowable before they play any NBA minutes, then you must be simultaneously arguing that any attempt to predict the performance of prospects and prioritize which ones to draft is also completely futile. You are therefore wasting your time with every player evaluation post in this thread, and I should go ahead and lock this thread right now.
Pretty much every year, as the days pass & the draft is STILL not here, draft discussions drift towards this kind of "theory." It's a waste of time, sure, but it does make the time pass!
Obviously, I would never make the claim you suggest I'm making (even by implication). Of course we can be right about a player; we can project correctly that he's going to be terrific (or terrible or mediocre or...). In the same way, we can be wrong; we can project a guy's future inaccurately.
Moreover, we are every one of us going to recall the guys we were right about -- more often, more vividly, & with greater self-satisfaction -- than we recall our errors! In the same way, the bigger one of our mistakes was the sooner we'll forget having made it!
Of course the strength of a prospective draft class is not "totally unknowable." But, it's not totally knowable either! The number of "bad" draft choices should tell you that (i.e. guys who don't work out -- not nearly as well as other guys picked later, often substantially later).
The POV I've taken on the 2024 class does not aim to characterize it. It doesn't aim to say, "this is gonna be a really strong draft class." That would be the same error, obviously! We can't even make that kind of statement about an individual prospect with a thousand percent accuracy. We can get close (Wemby), but we can also be very wrong.
My POV has two constituent pieces, both of which seem straightforwardly correct, especially since they don't make any particularly startling claims:
1. We can't know with any certainty how good
the overall class will be -- even though it's pretty easy to see that there are no stellar prospects (ala Wemby or Holmgren or... fill in the blank) projected in the top handful of prospective picks.
2. It seems possible that this draft class is deep. I.e. deeper than some others have been.
As I've written before, a helpful perspective comes from looking at the 2011 draft. After Kyrie, the lottery consisted of Derrick Williams, Enes Kanter, Tristan Thompson, Jonas Valanciunas, Jan Vesely, Bismack Biyombo, Brandon Knight, Kemba Walker, Jimmer Fredette, Klay Thompson, Alec Burks, Markieff Morris & Marcus Morris.
11 of those 13 lottery picks were substantial disappointments -- especially for guys picked in the lottery. Yet, 2 of the best players in the game were drafted later. & so were a number of very good NBA players.
Of course, we didn't "know" those 11 guys were going to be disappointing -- often complete failures! -- or they wouldn't have been picked!
Just as we didn't "know" that Tobias Harris would be better than any of the 11, or he'd have been picked much higher. We didn't know that IT would have an outstanding 10-year career in the league, or he wouldn't have had to wait to #60 to hear his name called! We didn't know that Cory Joseph would have 12+ year career as a solid NBA PG, or he wouldn't have heard Brandon Knight's name called before his. Or Nolan Smith's. Or even Norris Cole's.
Oh, & we didn't know that 2 first-ballot-HOFers would be picked at 15 & 30. Didn't know that eiter.
In spite of an overall weak lottery, 2011 turned out to be one h#ll of a draft.
In spite of a weak set of top-pick prospects, 2024 might turn out to be a very good draft overall.
Far as it goes.
