Jay81 wrote:I am not sold that Bennett is going to be a bust. He might be a 20 point scorer but I cant take that risk with this organization. Everytime we go for "upside", it blows up in our face. We cant afford that this year. Porter is little risk and its a better chance that he ends up better than Bennett away. Maybe Bennett is the more "Fun,sexy pick" but Porter is the better fit
As I'm from the bay area, I saw the Warriors get gun shy after Webber in the "'94 Summer of Hate" fest with Don Nelson, and viewed first hand a team taking a negative experience w/one player (and later another player with Spreewell and Chokegate) and dictating player personnel decisions on that experience for the forseeable future distorted a teams direction, development, and future as a whole. Going conservative was an abject disaster for the Warriors after that. They repeatedly erred on the side of caution in draft after draft following the Webber and Spreewell disasters, and as a result, picked Joe Smith instead of Wallace, or Garnett, picked Todd Freaking Fuller instead of Kobe, picked Adonal Foyle instead of Tracy McGrady, Jeff Foster in '99 (after doing a good job with Jamison in '99), JRich and Troy Murphy in '01, Dunleavy in '02 (what was it about obsessing on taking unathletic big men over and over again in the late nineties and early aughts?)? The failures would continue, but draft policy would change with Chris Mullin who would move from an advisory role to the head of the F.O. in '04.
I just can't be a party to following that kind of policy in terms of team building. I don't mind the Spurs and their nebulous Spurs-men, technique, in which essentially work habits, dedication, intelligence, and character are key note traits in their team building, because their scouting of players who possess those traits AND can become great pro's is damn near peerless not just in the NBA, but in sports as a whole over the past 15 years. But the vast majority of teams don't have that kind of quality in place in the F.O., and should focus instead on team building strategies in the long term, merged with evaluating prospects in the here and right now, rather than based on the aggravation of a Baltche two years ago, or a Gungate three years ago etc. Make decisions based on the here and now w/regards to a players worthiness of being drafted by you, while making decisions for team building itself based on the long view, rather than the short term. It's fine and good to make chemistry, and character a part of your process, but it isn't a wise consideration if it makes you gun shy, and downright stupid when greatness or vastly superior quality is staring right back at you in an eval process, which is what was the problem with what the Warriors did circa '95-''02, what the Wizards did in the '96 and '98 offseasons etc.
I don't want experiences with Young, McGee or Baltche dicating what we do going forward. Judge every player based on his own merits. Players are individuals, and are unique, they aren't Young, or McGee doppelgangors. If a player with upside has a ton of Young, or McGee or Baltche flags, by all means pass, but don't pass simply because you're worried "they might". Bennett doesn't strike me as anything like any of those three. Neither does Porter by a long stretch. We should make our decision based exclusively upon whom we think will make the best player over the next decade, and then pull the trigger. If any other consideration trumps that. It is wrong. Period.
