All Things NBA

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Scott dont you think that making judgements on players after one game is a bit premature?

Maybe those guys were more NBA ready because they played more but it is far too soon to declare any of them successes or busts.

Of course, you can't declare anything after one game. Like I said the 2nd to 4th picks will probably make it. I just can't believe the level of idiocy in the NBA that lets guys drop so far cause they have only shown they could be good NBA players instead of having shown nothing which could mean they could potentially be great or terrible. It is like if on every pick I offered you $12 or a random amount from $0 to $15 and everytime you went for the random amount. That seems to be the acceptable route for NBA GMs. I just find it very funny that Curry, Blair, and Lawson all had great first games despite being picked 6th, 17th, and 37th even though any college basketball fan could tell you those three were pretty much locks to be good pros but might not be great ones.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Of course, you can't declare anything after one game. Like I said the 2nd to 4th picks will probably make it. I just can't believe the level of idiocy in the NBA that lets guys drop so far cause they have only shown they could be good NBA players instead of having shown nothing which could mean they could potentially be great or terrible. It is like if on every pick I offered you $12 or a random amount from $0 to $15 and everytime you went for the random amount. That seems to be the acceptable route for NBA GMs. I just find it very funny that Curry, Blair, and Lawson all had great first games despite being picked 6th, 17th, and 37th even though any college basketball fan could tell you those three were pretty much locks to be good pros but might not be great ones.

I just dont follow the logic that the 6th and 17th picks are so overlooked. if you go back through the last few years drafts, there are a lot of high pick misses but there are also very few later pick succeses.

And I think the guys you mentioned are more like $6 or 7 dollars on the scale.

Who should have taken Curry or Lawson tht passed? Dont forget Blair has a questionable knee.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I just dont follow the logic that the 6th and 17th picks are so overlooked. if you go back through the last few years drafts, there are a lot of high pick misses but there are also very few later pick succeses.

And I think the guys you mentioned are more like $6 or 7 dollars on the scale.

Who should have taken Curry or Lawson tht passed? Dont forget Blair has a questionable knee.

Curry probably went exactly where he should have. Time will tell and his height may become a problem but Lawson looked the 2nd most NBA ready of anyone last year behind Griffin to me. I can't say he should have been #2 but I think he shouldn't have been much lower than #7.

As to Blair, he could be in a wheelchair and still grab more rebounds a game than BJ Mullens. San Antonio or Denver will win the NBA this year strictly because of the extra bench minutes that Blair/Lawson can give Duncan/Billups to keep them fresh for the playoffs. BJ Mullens will never match the double doubles by Blair through one game in his NBA career.

[dalakhani]

So now NBA GMS are supposed to structure their respective drafts based on how players will do...in their first game?????? This is a new level of silly.

So do we now ignore team need? Do we ignore potential? Do we ignore injury issues?

Do I think Lawson should have lasted to 17? No but at the same time, its not always about being "nba ready".

How about Danny Granger? Im sure he was at the top of your draft board in 2005 when he was drafted over more "nba ready" players like Hakim warrick and salim stoudamire.

NBA scouting is not perfect and just like every sport mistakes are made. How was JJ redick a lottery pick for instance? At the same time, lets wait three years before we start to declare the winners and losers in any draft.

[King Glorious]

Sniper, I agree with you 100% here. I would have taken guys like Curry and Lawson much higher than they went. There's no way in hell I would have taken Rubio higher than either one of them.

Anyway, at least for one night, the Mavs made me look like a genius. They beat the crap out of the Lakers in LA.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Sniper, I agree with you 100% here. I would have taken guys like Curry and Lawson much higher than they went. There's no way in hell I would have taken Rubio higher than either one of them.

Anyway, at least for one night, the Mavs made me look like a genius. They beat the crap out of the Lakers in LA.

You'd trade for Zach Randolph too

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You'd trade for Zach Randolph too

56% shooting, 22.0 pts, 8.0 reb per game. In the win over Detroit, 13-21 for 30 points and seven boards. I'll take that kinda production anyday.