GT: Hornets - Wizards Wed 14 December 7PM EST

[nate33]

- EG did not draft Blake/Hayes, that was Wes Unseld.

- Young was adequate/average for a 16 pick because if you did a redraft he would probably be in the 18-20 range of that draft.

- Blatche was a good pick; that extension was terrible though.

- I'm leaning towards calling Porter a good pick. There were better players out there like Giannis, Gobert, and Adams but man there were a lot of duds in the top 10 (Bennett, Burke, + McLemore. He's right now better than Noel.

*Note would be in favor of getting a new GM.

Thanks. I wasn't sure about Hayes and Blake. BBall reference has EG as GM starting in June of that year.

Regarding Young, I didn't specifically evaluate each player relative to their draft position in that specific draft. I evaluated each player relative to what is typically found in that range. I think a #16 pick should be useful enough that you want to keep him around into his second contract. We gave Young away for nothing because we didn't want him so I considered it a disappointment. I wouldn't quibble with you though. There's a case to be made that he is adequate.

Talentwise, Blatche was certainly a good pick. But due to his lazy and unprofessional attitude arguably dragging down the whole team, I leaned toward an "adequate" grade.

I like Porter a lot. However, the next 9 guys went as follows: Zeller, Len, Noel, McLemore, KCP, Burke, McCollum, MCW and Adams. So of the top 10 players on the board, 6 turned out pretty good (Porter, Zeller, Noel, KCP, McCollum, Adams), 2 would have been disappointing (Len and MCW) and 2 were busts (McLemore, Burke). EG had a 6 out of 10 chance if he merely picked randomly, so it's hard to say it was a particularly insightful pick.

[payitforward]

Ehh, he makes some pretty good trades midseason, like moving maynor and vesely for Andre Miller. So maybe wait on the Mahinmi slander until he plays and we see what the plan is in terms of moving Gortat at the deadline.

And I think the Oubre trade is extremely underrated, there were like 4 or 5 wing rated above Oubre, right now he looks like the best one by far in the class unless you consider Booker a wing. We were sitting at the 19th pick talking about veteren upperclassmen players to add to our bench and might've added another core piece, still early.

Remember, I think Ernie sucks also, all of this is me talking about this specific team, which i think can be pretty good. They need to stop playing Thornton though

Denver would have taken anything to get rid of Andre Miller. He'd had a confrontation with his coach and wasn't playing. Nothing clever about that move. Or, rather, what was clever about it was Ernie burying two huge mistakes.

Oubre was picked right where he was expected to be picked. Any wing rated above him went above him (e.g. Winslow). The decision to trade up for him was a good one, but there was no special talent evaluation needed.

In this Board at least, no, we were not looking at veteran upperclassmen for our bench. There was strong sentiment for Bobby Portis and some for Kevon Looney, and a little bit for Rondae Hollis-Jefferson and Tyus Jones.

"...all of this is me talking about this specific team, which i think can be pretty good" -- I can't imagine why you think that. Of course, I don't know what you mean by "pretty good".

In the EC, below average NBA teams make the playoffs. You think we're going to make the playoffs? "Think" we are, I mean, not "hope" we are. I don't.

There's only one measure of how good a team is: its record. You are as good as your record. If we end the season 41-41, it means we're an average team. Right now, we're 9-14; that means we're a below average team. Significantly below average.

[payitforward]

Just out of curiosity, can you do this for the GS gm?

Decide for yourself:



I see 4 unquestionably exceptional picks in Curry, Thompson, Green and Ezeli. Barnes and Looney look "adequate" to me. The only clear bust is Odoh. Jenkins and Kuzmic are too low in the draft to expect much. It's too soon to tell on Damian James.

So out of 9 players that we can evaluate, there are 4 "goods", 2 "adequates", 2 really late draft picks that were understandable disappointments, and only 1 true bust. And two of those "goods" were truly exceptional. Curry was an MVP picked at #6. Green may pan out to be one of the top 5 2nd round picks of all time.

In retrospect, I should have included "busts" in my Wizards evaluation. There were two: Vesely and Hayes, possibly Pecherov too if you expect a #18 pick to at least stick around the league beyond his rookie contract.

GS traded into R2 this year to pick Patrick McCaw for whom they have extremely high hopes (we'll have to see). & it's got to be way too early to make a call on Kevon Looney.

One thought: it seems to me when you consider whether a pick was good you have to look at the alternatives. E.g. in the 10 picks after Harrison Barnes, there's only one obvious instance of a better player: Andre Drummond. To me, that makes Barnes a "good" pick -- i.e. better than "adequate" -- even though I didn't think he'd make a terrific NBA player. Yet... he got a big contract this off season, so somebody still thinks well of him.

I'd say that in the years since 2008, we've probably made the worst use of any team in the NBA of the draft resources available to us. I can't think of any competition, really (but there must be some).

[NatP4]

Just out of curiosity, can you do this for the GS gm?

Decide for yourself:



I see 4 unquestionably exceptional picks in Curry, Thompson, Green and Ezeli. Barnes and Looney look "adequate" to me. The only clear bust is Odoh. Jenkins and Kuzmic are too low in the draft to expect much. It's too soon to tell on Damian James.

So out of 9 players that we can evaluate, there are 4 "goods", 2 "adequates", 2 really late draft picks that were understandable disappointments, and only 1 true bust. And two of those "goods" were truly exceptional. Curry was an MVP picked at #6. Green may pan out to be one of the top 5 2nd round picks of all time.

In retrospect, I should have included "busts" in my Wizards evaluation. There were two: Vesely and Hayes, possibly Pecherov too if you expect a #18 pick to at least stick around the league beyond his rookie contract.

GS traded into R2 this year to pick Patrick McCaw for whom they have extremely high hopes (we'll have to see). & it's got to be way too early to make a call on Kevon Looney.

One thought: it seems to me when you consider whether a pick was good you have to look at the alternatives. E.g. in the 10 picks after Harrison Barnes, there's only one obvious instance of a better player: Andre Drummond. To me, that makes Barnes a "good" pick -- i.e. better than "adequate" -- even though I didn't think he'd make a terrific NBA player. Yet... he got a big contract this off season, so somebody still thinks well of him.

I'd say that in the years since 2008, we've probably made the worst use of any team in the NBA of the draft resources available to us. I can't think of any competition, really (but there must be some).

That's easy, the Celtics

[tontoz]

There's only one measure of how good a team is: its record. You are as good as your record. If we end the season 41-41, it means we're an average team. Right now, we're 9-14; that means we're a below average team. Significantly below average.

Actually we are 10-14 but obviously your point stands. I would add that point differential can be a good indicator of future record and our point differential of -2.1 says we are where we belong, outside the top 8.

[AFM]

There's only one measure of how good a team is: its record. You are as good as your record. If we end the season 41-41, it means we're an average team. Right now, we're 9-14; that means we're a below average team. Significantly below average.

Actually we are 10-14 but obviously your point stands. I would add that point differential can be a good indicator of future record and our point differential of -2.1 says we are where we belong, outside the top 8.

Both of you are idiots, but I've been around long enough to know not to expect more than that from the two of you. Once lame brain Brooks unleashes Jason "Shaq 2.0" Smith into the starting lineup, I think you morons will be in for a rude awakening.

I'm talking 40 game winning streak.

[tontoz]

There's only one measure of how good a team is: its record. You are as good as your record. If we end the season 41-41, it means we're an average team. Right now, we're 9-14; that means we're a below average team. Significantly below average.

Actually we are 10-14 but obviously your point stands. I would add that point differential can be a good indicator of future record and our point differential of -2.1 says we are where we belong, outside the top 8.

Both of you are idiots, but I've been around long enough to know not to expect more than that from the two of you. Once lame brain Brooks unleashes Jason "Shaq 2.0" Smith into the starting lineup, I think you morons will be in for a rude awakening.

I'm talking 40 game winning streak.