I think I got three picks in my mock draft correctly. As usual, I failed to achieve the goal I set for myself in terms of getting the picks correct. Sorry this is a little late, but I went on vacation and blah, blah, blah...I'm just getting around to writing this. I enjoy doing the NBA Draft grades because I know most of the players, except for most of the foreign-born players who I don't pay attention to because (adopts deep Southern accent) I'm an American and that ain't real basketball they play overseas.
As I usually do, I'll grade the teams on a scale of 1-10 with "10" being the best and "1" being the worst, or as I may call it from now on "The Ainge." Here we go and I'm going to ignore what the teams have done in free agency because I still can't wrap my head around the money being thrown around. I recognize it's market value for these players, plus THE CAP IS GOING UP SO IT'S OKAY TO SPEND MONEY IN FREE AGENCY, but I still struggle a bit with some of the money that was handed out in free agency. The cap is going up, but I still think a lot of these teams are going to be looking to unload the contracts they recently handed out over the next two or three years.
Atlanta Hawks
Of course the first team is hard to judge because they took two European guys that I've never heard of and traded Kelly Oubre for Tim Hardaway Jr. I thought Oubre should have stayed in school for another year and the Hawks needed another scorer. So the trade sounds good on paper. Yet, Hardaway Jr. is a chucker who didn't manage to shoot 40% from the field last year. Short term it might be a good move, especially if Hardaway Jr. is able to find a role with the Hawks. The role being "don't shoot 11 times per game and stand in the corner to wait for your chance to shoot." It was sort of a punt-type of draft for the Hawks.
Grade: 3
Boston Celtics
To say I hated this draft would probably not fully describe how much I hated this draft. Terry Rozier is a volume-scorer who isn't a point guard and is much too small to be a shooting guard. I don't see what he adds to the team. He's not as good as Marcus Smart, he isn't a good scorer like Isaiah Thomas, and he can't play defense like Avery Bradley. I despise R.J. Hunter as a first round pick. The fact he was taken more towards the second round mitigates the choice a bit, but wow, he is a shooter who isn't a good shooter. I wouldn't have drafted him even close to the beginning of the second round. Jordan Mickey is the only pick I think that can save this draft for the Celtics and only because I think he'll give the Celtics a guy who actually has the ability to block shots. Overall, I didn't like the Celtics going with two guards in the first round and I didn't like the guards they picked.
Grade: 1
Brooklyn Nets
The Nets basically got Michael Kidd-Gilchrist with the #23 pick. They had to give up Mason Plumlee to do it, but in terms of value, I like Rondae Hollis-Jefferson. At worst, he will be a good defender and that will keep him on the floor. He won't be a starter, but can be a Tony Allen-type off the bench. I mocked Cliff Alexander to the Nets because I thought they needed a young power forward on the roster and there would be one available at the end of the first round. I chose the wrong one. I hope the Nets are patient with Chris McCullough, because I think he has the chance to be a contributor in the NBA. He's like 155 pounds soaking wet though and he's coming off major surgery. The Nets weren't in a position to get a great talent who will help immediately, but I think they showed themselves fairly well.
Grade: 7
Charlotte Hornets
Where to start?
1. I thought with Justise Winslow being available here, they Hornets should have taken him instead of Frank Kaminsky.
2. Fine, choose Kaminsky. If the Celtics offer of four 1st round picks (and change) to the Hornets is true (which I believe it was) then why not make the trade and offer two first round picks to the Heat just to move up to #10 and select Frank Kaminsky? Winslow will be gone at that point, so the Heat could be open to the trade.
3. Fine, the Heat aren't open to the trade. Some team between spot #11 and #16 will be open to this trade, because the value of two first round picks to move back just a few spots has to be tempting. Some team, somewhere would take this trade. They would have to.
4. Fine, no teams wanted to make a trade and the Hornets wanted Kaminsky that badly. Tell the Heat you are making a trade with the Celtics who want Winslow, do the Heat want Winslow? If so, make the Hornets an offer to move up one spot. Then the Heat get Winslow and the Hornets get SOMETHING and still get Kaminsky at #10. Everyone can then laugh at Danny Ainge about how he got played by Michael Jordan and the Hornets.
5. Fine, the Heat think this is absurd and the Celtics are angry the Hornets are going behind their back to cut another deal and refusing four 1st round picks. Everyone hates the Hornets now and no one wants to do a deal with them ever again. Draft Kaminsky and know you tried to get more value out of a pick you were making anyway. My point, is the Hornets had so many options to get Frank Kaminsky, along with something else in a trade, and they didn't seem to want to do it.
I think Frank Kaminsky wasn't a terrible pick. In terms of execution, the Hornets get a big fat "1" from me in terms of a draft grade. The pick isn't going to be terrible, but it could have been so much better. Kaminsky can shoot well, which the Hornets need, but the Hornets also dangled their last two first round picks in trades prior to the draft, so I do have to wonder if they know what the hell they are doing overall. A team that tries to trade their last two lottery picks isn't suddenly going to start making savvy moves. I like Kaminsky as a role player, but I hated how this all went down for the Hornets.
Grade: 4
Chicago Bulls
I like Bobby Portis. I don't know if he will be a star, but he really works hard to improve his game (as seen by his improvement from freshman to sophomore year at Arkansas) and he will fit in well with the Bulls. He's not going to be asked to start and he'll learn from Pau Gasol while trying to out-effort Taj Gibson and Joakim Noah in practice. This is a great spot for Portis, which of course means he will fail miserably with the Bulls. The Bulls just sat there and let Portis fall to them though. That's always a winning strategy when it works.
Grade: 9
Cleveland Cavaliers
I hate Syracuse centers. It's just a thing for me. Syracuse centers play in the zone defense and aren't always ready for the NBA game if you ask me. Maybe I'm just thinking of Fab Melo. It's hard to fault the Cavs for drafting Rakeem Christmas in the second round though. He did improve at Syracuse and really did block shots. It's not like the Cavs don't have a need for a shot blocker or anything. I know very little about Cedi Osman, but hey, he's a foreign-born player so I'm sure Chad Ford loved him. Indeed, he did:
Osman is a terrific point guard with great size for his position putting
up solid numbers for his age. He needs to get stronger and his shot is
pretty ugly, but there's a lot of talent there. He's No. 43 in our Top
100 and could easily sneak into the late first round as international
players tend to do.
Ford loves Osman so much that he can't even decide if Osman is a point guard or a small forward:
Osman has the most upside of anyone left. He's a playmaking three who,
while he can't really shoot, does just about everything else well. He's a
likely draft-and-stash for the Lakers though his play for Efes this
season suggests he may be more ready than some.
Osman can play multiple positions well, and even though he can't shoot (why would he need to shoot to play basketball anyway?), he's a terrific point guard/small forward/he can do it all.
The best thing about Sir'Dominic Pointer is his name. Mockery of Syracuse centers and international players aside, not a horrible draft for the Cavs. Besides, they aren't exactly looking for guys to come in and play big minutes this year anyway.
Grade: 6
Dallas Mavericks
I like Justin Anderson a lot. He's an excellent defender whose offensive skills got lost on a Virginia team where offense means not scoring too many points in order to finally play a game where they win despite scoring less than 30 points. His value to the team could be seen in how they struggled once he got injured. Anderson isn't the type of scorer like Monta Ellis was, but I'm not sure he will need to be when coming off the bench. This was one of the very few picks I got correct and I think it was a nice choice. The Mavericks then selected a guy from India in the second round who is tall. This has never been done before. So Mark Cuban is looking to sell t-shirts in India.
Grade: 7
Denver Nuggets
I'm probably going to shade this grade lower than I should because (a) I'm not a huge Mudiay fan and (b) I can't figure out why the Nuggets are running one point guard of town just to draft another one. Money, I guess. Happiness, I guess. Rebuilding, most likely. It's horrible analysis, but there is something about Mudiay I just don't like. I feel like he's not a great shooter, but of course he's still young. I don't find him to be the dynamic point guard that I feel like he's being touted as. Maybe that's it. So the Nuggets did a good job to fill the point guard position that seems like it will be open soon. I'm not a fan of the pick, even if I understand the need.
Grade: 4
Detroit Pistons
I'm very "blah" on Stanley Johnson. For me, he's another one of those small forwards coming out of college that has all of the physical skills necessary to succeed, but I feel like he over-relies on those skills at times. An over-reliance on being more athletic and natural ability can only take him so far. Not that Johnson didn't work at Arizona, but he was inconsistent in his effort. Most of what could make Johnson succeed in the NBA isn't entirely what he showed at Arizona, but what his body and ability makes it seem like he could do. That causes me to be nervous. I would have drafted Justise Winslow here, but the Pistons clearly felt differently. They needed a small forward, so not a bad pick, and he's probably worth the risk. Darrun Hilliard is a pick I didn't understand. I know it's the second round where anything goes, but there were better options at #38 than Hilliard. At least I thought so.
Grade: 5
Golden State Warriors
I generally hate drafting guys on potential in the first round. It seems to me how busts often happen. It's easier to draft a guy on potential when it's the last pick of the first round though. I had Looney going to Boston in the middle of the first round and he almost lasted until the second round. The Warriors ran an interesting defense this year with Draymond Green at center and they could do that because they had athletic, tall guys who can guard multiple positions at the other spots. Well, Kevin Looney is an athletic, tall guy as well. He's not going to contribute much this year and possibly not the year after that, but I think he's going to eventually crack the Warriors rotation. He doesn't really have a position (he's a forward, but not really a power or small forward), which is normally a bad thing, but for the Warriors I think it works. I like this pick even if Looney busts, only because his talent has him going in the late lottery if he stayed in school one more year.
Grade: 9
Houston Rockets
I love making snide comments about Daryl Morey, the smartest GM in the history of the NBA. See? I did it again. I think he did a good job in this draft. Sam Dekker can be a more athletic Kyle Korver and I love Montrezl Harrell, even if he went to Louisville. I don't think either of these players are going to help the Rockets win the NBA title this year, but Harrell is a tough rebounder and isn't ever going to short the Rockets on effort. Dekker can be one of the guys off the bench (like Ariza) who can benefit from James Harden driving to the basket and kicking it out for a three-point shot. I know the Rockets had a point guard mocked to them in a lot of mock drafts since it was an area of need, but I think this draft is going to help the Rockets' bench this upcoming season.
Grade: 8
Indiana Pacers
Myles Turner runs so funny though. Plus, he voluntarily played for Rick Barnes, without a gun to his head forcing him to make this decision. Of course, so did Kevin Durant. I wasn't a fan of Myles Turner for most of the college basketball season. He too often wanted to shoot three-point shots and couldn't take minutes away from the ever-ballooning Cameron Ridley. He was the #2 center in the class behind Jahlil Okafor and only played 22 minutes per game. He shot 2 three-pointers a game, despite the fact he's almost seven feet tall and only made 27% of those three-point shots. He can block shots though. He's a taller, more awkward Josh Smith. That's how I saw him and I'm not sure my opinion has changed much. It's softened, probably beaten down by nearly every draft reviewer who thinks Turner has a high ceiling and not much of a floor. I didn't like Andre Drummond either, so keep that in mind. I idiotically killed Drummond. BUT, I did say this:
7. Golden State- Andre Drummond, C
As
a rule, I tend to dislike the Warriors draft picks. I hated the Klay
Thompson pick last year and I didn't like Anthony Randolph or Epke Udoh
that much either when they were drafted. So I know I will hate this
pick. The Warriors need a big man, even if they have Andrew Bogut on the
roster, you can't have too much size. Mark Jackson wants to turn the
Warriors into a defensive team and I think they try to start this
progression by drafting Andre Drummond. He could be special
He COULD be special, so I wasn't wrong...right? Actually, very wrong. Here's the best part:
or he could also be the reason Mark Jackson is back in the booth with Jeff Van Gundy in two years.
Two years later, Mark Jackson was back in the booth with Jeff Van Gundy. Why? Not because of Andre Drummond. So perhaps Myles Turner is the guy I am going to be very wrong about in this draft, but I think he has some bad habits he picked up at Texas and I don't know if he even wants to break them. He seems like a stretch-four in a center's body. Not sure that works for him in the NBA.
Grade: 2 (For Pacers fans, this is good news)
Los Angeles Lakers
I would have taken Okafor if I were the Lakers. They liked D'Angelo Russell more so that's good for them. I think they made a mistake, but I don't hate Russell. My concern with Russell is that he came from an Ohio State team where his deficiencies were masked by the fact the team didn't have a ton of other options. He's not a great defender, though he was a freshman so I can excuse that, but the fact he was one of the few scorers on the OSU team covered up for the fact his decision-making can be a bit questionable at times and his shot selection isn't always great. So it's hard for me to judge how he'll transition to the NBA, because the issues that are going to plague him in the NBA weren't issues at OSU, simply out of necessity. I'll say that Russell could be fun to watch and his upside is that he could be the best player in the draft. If he matures as he is capable then that's a definite possibility. He wouldn't have been my choice in this spot. Larry Nance Jr. wasn't a bad pick, but he was a bad first round pick. His game is limited and I thought there were better options available to the Lakers at the #27 spot. He's not worth a first round pick, though I could just pretend he and Anthony Brown (the Lakers second round pick) are flipped. Brown has a skill, three-point shooting, that could keep him in the NBA and I think he may end up being one of those guys who is better in the NBA than he was in college.
Grade: 4
Los Angeles Clippers
The Clippers originally had no pick. So having a pick is better than not having a pick, right? Especially when their bench needed a major infusion of talent. So they bought Branden Dawson from the Pelicans. I've heard lazy analysts say he could be this year's Draymond Green, which is lazy because they both went to Michigan State and both stayed four years and both don't have a definite pro position. I'm not sure how to grade this pick since I don't see Dawson as an NBA player, but the Clippers needed a pick to at least have some infusion of young talent. What Dawson does well is that the fills up a stat sheet, which is going to be his ticket to receiving playing time. It's not easy finding a player who has a diverse skill set like Dawson has late in the second round. Dawson will at least be a competitive practice player. I'll give them credit for that.
Grade: 5 for effort, though I doubt Dawson sticks.
Memphis Grizzlies
I don't know who promises Jarell Martin a first round spot, but I guess that's what the Grizzlies did. He's just not a good enough offensive player for me to take in the first round. I wouldn't have made this pick if I were the Grizzlies. He's not a great shot blocker either. So for me, he's a long, athletic player who isn't an offensive threat and isn't that interested in playing defense. I don't see him in the league in three years. Andrew Harrison wasn't a bad pick, given his size and the fact he has played a lot of big time college basketball games, but I can't see him making an impact in the NBA. Of course, he was a second round pick, so perhaps I'm being hard on him.
Grade: 2
Miami Heat
The Heat did great by doing nothing and landing Justise Winslow. I don't think Winslow is going to be a top-five player at his position or anything, but he's a talented player who is capable of doing a lot of things well on offense, is super-competitive and willing to play defense. I think he was a better choice for the Pistons, but he has that knock of his ceiling being lower than other players taken before him. Josh Richardson could stick in the NBA based on his defensive ability and the development of his shooting. If he doesn't get better at both, he won't make it. I didn't hate the pick for the Heat though.
Grade: 8
Milwaukee Bucks
Man, I'm going negative a lot here. Rashad Vaughn. I like how he shoots the basketball and he is so young (not that he is the only one in the draft who is young of course), that he can grow out of some of the deficiencies he has. How do I put this politely...he would have benefited from some better coaching in college and if Jason Kidd and his staff can coach Vaughn up then he can be a scorer coming off the bench. The Bucks also traded for Greivis Vasquez, as there is a mandate from the NBA that the Bucks trade for, or trade to another team, at least one point guard every six months.
Grade: 5
Minnesota Timberwolves
I would have chosen Okafor personally, but again, Towns wasn't the wrong choice. I'm excited to watch him play beside Andrew Wiggins. He's only touched his potential and he's definitely going to be a much better defender than Okafor. For Towns, my biggest question is whether he is ready to be "the guy" for an NBA team. Though I guess that may not be answered since Wiggins will be "the guy" for the foreseeable future. Still, how's he going to handle the nightly grind of the NBA? He only played 20 minutes per game in college. Otherwise, I can't argue with his selection. I also liked the Tyus Jones selection, only in that the T-Wolves need to get Zach LaVine closer and closer to his inevitable career on the And-1 circuit. Jones will only be a backup in the NBA, but he's smart with the basketball and doesn't need to shoot in order to make an impact on the game.
Grade: 9
New Orleans Pelicans
They traded Branden Dawson. I can not grade them in this draft, unless the Clippers sent counterfeit bills in return for Dawson. In which case, the Pelicans need to be more careful when accepting money from strangers.
New York Knicks
I don't have as much of an issue with the Knicks' draft because they aren't in a position to win-now. They want to now and the fans want them to win-now, but that's not reality. I know little about either Porzingis or Hernangomez, other than the name "Hernangomez" sounds like a glitch on a video game where a player's first name and last name are melded together. I do know Jerian Grant and he was Notre Dame's best player last year. I think he's going to be a starter in the NBA very soon. The Knicks weren't trying to win now, and if the international scouts can be believed, the Knicks may have gotten the best player at #4.
Grade: 7
Oklahoma City Thunder
I think Cameron Payne is going to be the the next mid-major player to star in the NBA. Of course, as soon as I say that, he'll never turn into anything. Regardless, Payne was an absolute stud at Murray State last year and pretty much does everything well. He's not athletic and he's skinny. He also tends to make mistakes, but he's going to a good NBA team because he's not going to be running the show. Russell Westbrook will be. I think Payne will end up being a nice replacement for Reggie Jackson. Dakari Johnson looks slightly cross-eyed and like he just came off playing a caveman in the Geico commercials, but I think he'll be a good NBA backup. He's limited, but he's a big guy who doesn't trip over himself. That alone has given many NBA players a 5-7 year career and at least one irresponsible free agent contract offer.
Grade: 8
Orlando Magic
Every report on Mario Hezonja says that he is very confident. So I guess that's good as long as it is used appropriately. The Magic seem to have a pretty good core with Payton, Oladipo, Hezonja, though I can't help but wonder if they will regret not going with Willie Cauley-Stein for his defensive abilities. It was early to take Cauley-Stein, so I guess not drafting him makes sense. Still, I'd like to see what he could do with Payton and Oladipo. Poor Tyler Harvey. He led the nation in scoring, but he seems to small to score like that in the NBA. I could be wrong, because he can shoot. I wish I knew more about Hezonja, but I can't knock the Magic too much since they didn't turn down four 1st round picks for the honor of choosing Hezonja.
Grade: 6
Philadelphia 76ers
So the Lakers choosing Russell over Okafor probably won't work out for either team. The 76ers don't really need another center and they wanted Russell, because the 76ers backcourt is awful on paper. I like the pick of Jahlil Okafor. His ceiling isn't seen as being high, but he can score points, rebound and I think he will improve his defense towards being respectable. The 76ers have to be trading either Joel Embiid or Okafor. It's got to be happening. Otherwise, the 76ers chose a couple of European big men, a college player I had not heard of (Richaun Holmes), and J.P. Tokoto. Ask UNC fans about J.P. Tokoto. He can jump and is super-athletic. His game needs so much work to catch up with his athleticism. Is Philly the right place for that? I'm in a weird position of liking the 76ers pick, but not liking this draft, as they really didn't fix any of the true holes they have on the roster.
Grade: 3 (based on bad luck and four other picks that were underwhelming...I like Okafor)
Phoenix Suns
I don't know why I didn't mock Devin Booker to the Suns. It made so much sense. I'm kicking myself. Booker is a great shooter and the Suns needed another shooter on the roster. They also traded for Jon Leuer, which is good news because maybe he will somehow cut into Alex Len's minutes and everyone can admit that Len was never really that good in the first place. I could have (and did) tell the Suns that a few years ago. I don't know if I buy Booker as an NBA starter, but in a league where outside shooting is becoming more and more important, Booker is NBA-ready as a shooter. He can stroke the three-point shot and he's really, really young so other facets of his game can develop too. It's hard to find guys with elite skills, but the Suns found one.
Grade: 8
Portland Trailblazers
The Trailblazers traded the #23 pick for Mason Plumlee. It seems like a decent move considering the Trailblazers are going to need some forwards. Plumlee is much better off the bench than as a starter, but it's not like they gave up a ton with the #23 pick. Pat Connaughton is a mystery to me. Watching him, I can never figure out exactly what he does best, but he seems to have an impact on games. So Connaughton is a workout warrior, but he's also managed to contribute in college. Therefore, he vexes me.
Grade: 5
Sacramento Kings
This seems a bit high for Willie Cauley-Stein. I like him a lot, but he has very, very little offensive game and most of his value is tied up into his versatility and ability to be a great defender of multiple positions. I mean, he's a freak in terms of being able to defend multiple positions. He reminds me of a taller Dennis Rodman at times. He has absolutely no offensive game at this point, though I guess that won't matter much since DeMarcus Cousins will be doing most of the post scoring. I love Cauley-Stein, but I still have no idea how an NBA team properly utilizes him. He's an NBA player I would love to watch, but I don't know if I would want him on my team. I'm not a fan of the selection so high, despite my infatuation with Cauley-Stein's skill set. I think there were better picks out there, even if it meant selecting a guy I didn't like (Emmanuel Mudiay), but better fit a need in George Karl's offense.
Grade: 3
San Antonio Spurs
My thoughts on the Spurs first round pick: Who?
My thoughts on the Spurs second round pick: Heard of him, didn't think he would get drafted.
Grade 1.0: 10 (didn't ruin the chance to land quality free agents), which was more important than choosing a contributing player.
Grade 2.0: 2 If the Spurs are going to choose a player who may not contribute then why not take a more talented underachieving player in the second round, who the organization can perform their magic on and transform him into a contributing player?
Toronto Raptors
Delon Wright was a difficult player for me to analyze. He's not a great shooter and was used to controlling the ball at Utah. Still, he was one of the best players in the country and should prove to be a pretty good NBA backup point guard. The Raptors needed to draft another point guard (though Wright is more of a combo guard) after trading Vasquez and Wright is an experienced option who will fit in. I liked the Norman Powell selection as well. I don't know if he will make it, but he gives good effort on defense and showed steady improvement over four years at UCLA. Solid, not great draft.
Grade: 6
Utah Jazz
I really liked this draft for the Jazz. I'm a big fan of Olivier Hanlan and can see a situation where he will get big minutes for the Jazz. His talent was covered up by Boston College teams that lacked talent and a direction. As long as Hanlan realizes he doesn't have to carry the load in the NBA, I think he has a skill set to be a 10-year pro. I also like Trey Lyles. Part of the reason he didn't go higher in the draft is he played out of position at the small forward spot all year for Kentucky. He would have been much better served coming off the bench as opposed to being thrust into the small forward spot after Alex Poythress' season-ending injury. I'm sure Poythress would agree. He's a good shooter for his age and size, plus he's also a strong rebounder. I think the Jazz got a steal in both picks. Hanlan will give the Jazz more experience (granted, college experience) at point guard and Lyles can come off the bench and give teams a different look from Favors.
Grade: 10
Washington Wizards
I like that the Wizards drafted Kelly Oubre, even if I'm not a huge fan of Oubre. The Wizards needed to be aggressive in taking a shot to make the team better, and while I do think Oubre should have stayed in school, he does have that special potential to be a great player. He also has potential to never be any good too. He's the ideal for teams that love potential, at least he's the ideal in this year's draft. While I do have hesitations about Oubre transitioning to the NBA, he responded when Bill Self benched his ass at the beginning of the year and took it as a challenge to improve. That's a good sign. Aaron White won't ever play much in the NBA and I'm not sure why he was drafted. He's a decent shooter, but unless he turns into Matt Bonner I can't see him making an impact in the NBA. Maybe the Wizards felt White was pro-ready, but I would have taken a bigger gamble in the second round to improve their big man rotation.
Grade: 5
So feel free to grade my grades harshly.
Showing posts with label nba draft. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nba draft. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
Thursday, June 25, 2015
2 comments 2015 NBA Mock Draft
My mock draft last year got all messed up in the beginning as it seems most of my NBA mock drafts do. So I figured I would go ahead and show how stupid I am for at least one more year and try to post a 2015 NBA mock draft. Last year no team really screwed up my mock like the Cavs did in 2013 (thanks again, guys), I just made bad predictions. It's par for the course I guess. This year the 76ers may have another chance at drafting a center and there are some quality foreign-born players in the draft, which we all know makes Chad Ford pee in his pants with excitement. I'm guessing I will get five picks right this year, which could end up being a record of some sort. I'm aiming high, just so the fall will be harder. Undoubtedly my picks will be ruined after the Lakers' pick. Heck, the Lakers may even screw up the rest of my mock.
It's tough, because I want my picks to be correct, but I also understand if I follow the mock drafts out there then my picks will end up being wrong. Mock drafts are very rarely extremely accurate. So I am going to miss on some picks because I didn't follow the mocks, while I may hit on other picks based on how my mock is falling. Guessing is fun until you want your guesses to be correct.
1. Minnesota Timberwolves- Karl-Anthony Towns, PF
Here is my deal with this pick. Try to hold on to the roller coaster of my opinion. This is the right pick. Minnesota is the perfect place for Jahlil Okafor, so this is a big loss for him. Okafor needs to be paired initially with a rim protector and I have a huge man-crush on Gorgui Dieng. I think he would be the perfect guy to pair with Okafor. Towns is probably the right pick here, but if I were the Timberwolves I would be tempted to go with a player who has lower potential, but has a great offensive game to match up with Andrew Wiggins developing skill set. That's Okafor. Towns is an upside pick, a pick for good defense and maybe the right one. I would choose Okafor. I'm not mad at them for taking Towns because it makes sense as well. It's not the wrong pick, just not the pick I would make.
2. Los Angeles Lakers- Jahlil Okafor, C
It's tempting to go with D'Angelo Russell here, but if you look at his numbers in college, he tended to struggle going up against good teams. Of course, there wasn't many other great players on the Ohio State squad to help Russell, so he can be forgiven for that. The two big concerns about Okafor are overblown in my opinion. Conditioning and defense. He's a 19 year kid, so his conditioning issues are overblown. Many true centers would have conditioning issues at the age of 19. It's how it goes, but the evolution of the NBA away from a back-to-the-basket center has sort of covered up for this. "True" back-to-the-basket centers aren't in peak physical shape at 19 years of age. He did play 30 minutes per game at Duke, so it's not like he hasn't played bigger minutes. Defense is an issue, but defense can be taught. Again, Okafor is 19 years old and hasn't had to play defense because he's so good on offense. I don't think he will be a great defensive player, but he will end up being good enough. Pairing him with a shot blocker initially is a good move. That means, don't pair with Julius Randle. Oh well. Okafor has some professional post moves and he is an excellent passer. The Duke offense ran through him, but it didn't have to go THROUGH him if that makes sense. He was effective in college when not taking shots and still getting touches every time down the floor. I apologize for the length, but I have strong feelings about Okafor. He may not be Hakeem Olajuwon, but he's a center who will be able to score the basketball in the post. Those are hard to find. I know he seems to lack athleticism and upside, but he can play basketball.
3. Philadelphia 76ers- D'Angelo Russell, PG/SG
Here is where things get shaky. I have no idea who the 76ers may pick. Would they pick Okafor if he fell to them? No, because then the Celtics would trade up for Okafor (right?????????). I'm going with consensus here because the 76ers need guards. I know Sam Hinkie is "accumulating assets" but Tony Wroten, Hollis Thompson, and JaKarr Sampson are currently projected to be among the players at the guard spot for the 76ers. They need guards and though I do have some reserves about Russell that I can't pinpoint exactly, he's the sort of Steph Curry-type (not in terms of shooting ability) which teams are going to covet. The Sixers could take Emmanuel Mudiay and shock the world, but from the trade of Michael Carter-Williams I think it's clear they had their fill of taller point guards.
4. New York Knicks- Kristaps Porzingis, PF/C
Now it gets even fuzzier. If the Knicks even keep this pick, who will they select? It seems the Knicks value versatility and Kristaps Porzingis appears to be versatile from every scouting report I have read about him. He can protect the rim and allow Carmelo to play the power forward position. Of course, everything I know about him is based on the hype train that has been running through the Interwebs and I have never actually seen him play. I hope he fails miserably because his name is hard to spell. Also, Knicks fans are not going to like the idea of the team taking a foreign-born player as Frederic Weis is still fresh in their minds. I'm sure Chad Ford loves Kristaps Porzingis. Indeed, he does. Ford thinks every team should draft Porzingis. I'm sure Ford will be outraged if Porzingis goes anywhere past #7. Based on Ford liking Porzingis I'll go ahead and say this is a bad pick for the Knicks.
5. Orlando Magic- Justice Winslow, SF
The Magic just traded Luke Ridnour yesterday. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR THIS PICK? I may have made this pick simply because I want to see Oladipo, Payton, and Winslow play together. I am throwing Willie Cauley-Stein in here as a wild card selection. The Magic need a rim protector and they may as well just admit that drafting Aaron Gordon probably will end up being a huge mistake. Just give up on him prematurely, that's the ticket. I think it would be interesting to see Cauley-Stein in this spot, but he has less offensive game than Aaron Gordon did coming out of college, so I can't see the Magic choosing an athletic dude without any semblance of offensive game twice in the lottery. Winslow will be one of the three best players in this draft. I believe that. I think he has a brighter future than Okafor has. He can guard multiple positions, is a good shooter and a great competitor (as long as the refs continue to allow him to run over the opposition without calling a charge).
6. Sacramento Kings- Emmanuel Mudiay, PG
George Karl likes his point guards and Emmanuel Mudiay plays the position of point guard, so that seems like an ideal fit. I think Karl is going to want to take a point guard considered a talent like Mudiay is considered to be, simply so he has someone running the offense Karl wants to run effectively. I do not like Emmanuel Mudiay all that much. He's a slasher who is a bad foul shooter, he's not a great shooter, and he has people around him who give him mediocre advice (I get going to China to play for money reasons, but I think attending SMU would have been the best choice). I'm not a fan, but Mudiay has the "upside" NBA teams like, so he goes #6 in the draft.
7. Denver Nuggets- Mario Hezonja, SF
This is another foreign-born player that I don't know very much about. I know he is confident in his abilities and the Nuggets need a player at his position. He supposedly has the personality required to in tough situations, and unlike some foreign-born players, has had success overseas prior to coming to the United States. I wish I knew more about him. I know he seems to be confident and that is something the Nuggets can build on, right?
8. Detroit Pistons- Sam Dekker, SF
Obviously these are all guesses, but I'm really guessing here that the Pistons would favor Dekker's athletic ability and shooting over the "upside" of Stanley Johnson and any other player who conceivably could be considered to be a smarter pick. I'm a little torn on Dekker. I see the potential and he had a great NCAA Tournament. I think this would be a little early to take him though. Stan Van Gundy will value Dekker's height and ability to play the stretch-four spot with Drummond at center. Maybe he's the American version of Hedo Turkoglu. At worse, Dekker can play small forward and Ilaysova can play the four spot, which means the Pistons still have height and outside shooting to surround Drummond with.
9. Charlotte HornCats- Stanley Johnson, SF
I hear the HornCats need shooting. This is probably why every mock draft but a few have Devin Booker mocked in this spot. I'm going in a different direction though. I think the HornCats are going to go with Stanley Johnson, even with the trade of Gerald Henderson and Noah Vonleh. I do not like Stanley Johnson, as I feel he is more potential than anything else. He could turn into something great and with Michael Jordan calling out his team's talent level recently it makes sense to me the team doesn't go with a guy who is just a great shooter like Devin Booker is.
10. Miami Heat- Willie Cauley-Stein, C
Cauley-Stein is an absolute freak of an athlete. I love watching play, but also have no clue what to do with him. He's a center, but he can guard multiple positions, but he also has very, very little offensive game. That offensive game could come in time though and this is a BPA pick since it doesn't appear the Heat need another center with Hassan Whiteside breaking out. That being said, Cauley-Stein is also insurance against Whiteside wanting to be overpaid next summer (and who wouldn't want to be overpaid?) and Whiteside ending up being a one year wonder.
11. Indiana Pacers- Cameron Payne, PG
I don't think the Pacers will be picking in this spot, because I believe they will do what they can to move up. This is another pick I'm torn on. If the mock draft goes the way I have it going, I don't know if the Pacers try to get Myles Turner in this spot. I probably don't like Devin Booker more than other teams do, so I should mock him here. Larry Bird has seen how Lillard and Payton went from small schools to success in the NBA and the biggest knock against Payne is that he comes from a school that isn't huge. I don't think this will matter to Bird. It doesn't matter to me either. Payne poured in 23-7-4 against Xavier and 23-4-6 and 20-6-10 against Belmont. Those were pretty good teams last year. He can be a starter in the NBA, despite "only" playing for Murray State.
12. Utah Jazz- Frank Kaminsky, PF/C
It's so hard not to mock Frank Kaminsky in this spot. I in no way think Kaminsky is the best talent available, but I do believe he fits what the Jazz want to do. I probably am incorrect in having Kaminsky fall this far. Adding him to a lineup featuring Derrick Favors and Rudy Gobert would be a problem for other teams, especially if Gordon Hayward is playing the small forward spot in this lineup. The Jazz need a big man off the bench to shoot and provide a different look. I don't think Trey Lyles is that guy and it's too early to reach for a "true" point guard. Kaminksy will be a productive shooter in the NBA, but I'm not sure he'll be more than that.
13. Phoenix Suns- Myles Turner, C
It's hard to fairly evaluate Myles Turner because he played for Rick Barnes. Rick Barnes is not a good head coach, so is it Barnes' fault that Turner didn't quite turn into the freshmen he was supposed to be? Turner runs like he's 50 years old, but he can shoot the three-point shot* and block shots. I warned the Suns against drafting Alex Len a few years ago, so it's clear they don't listen to me. Myles Turner can block shots though, so hopefully he'll stop hanging around the perimeter in the NBA and get on the low block where I think he has the best chance of succeeding. To me, Turner is a stretch four that isn't good at running the floor, an okay shooter and he's sort of soft (in my opinion). It's a wasted pick, but I can see why the Suns would make it.
*He CAN, but he only shot 27% and I don't see any reason that he should be hanging around the three-point line as he is already 240 pounds and his body should fill out more as he ages.
14. Oklahoma City Thunder- Devin Booker, SG
Another tough choice here. The Thunder were giving regular minutes to Anthony Morrow last year and Morrow has one skill, shooting the three-point shot. Why not take the best three-point shooter in the draft and see if he can turn into something more than that along the way? The reason I say it is a tough choice is there are guys with higher ceilings available who could very well turn out to be great NBA players in time (Lyles, Oubre), inside guys who can provide rebounding and toughness (Harrell, Portis), as well as Justin Anderson who is a great all-around player. The Thunder needed bench help for most of the year last year and Devin Booker at worst will be an excellent shooter, maybe another Anthony Morrow.
15. Atlanta Hawks- Bobby Portis, PF
I'm assuming the Hawks are the Spurs of the East Coast. They like guys who play defense, know their role and can do several things well (of course, who doesn't like that?). There is no way the Hawks keep Carroll and Millsap, so they are going to need some more frontcourt depth. The Cavs seemed to kill them on the boards in the playoffs, while Portis isn't ever going to be accused of not providing enough energy and effort. It seems Portis fits what the Hawks are looking for in a player, though again, there are guys with higher upsides available. If the Hawks are wanting to go in that direction then I think Kelly Oubre or even R.J. Hunter could be the pick.
16. Boston Celtics- Kevin Looney, PF
The good news is the Celtics have a lot of options because they have quite a few holes in the lineup. Their whole starting lineup seems to consist of guys you would want on your team, but possibly not starting for a playoff team. I don't think the Celtics will be making this pick in this spot, but if they do, then there is a glaring need at small forward and power forward. I'm neutral on Looney. He's a good rebounder and is a good scorer, but he's also skinny. Weight can be put on and I think if the Celtics make this pick then they could go with a guy who I think has been slightly underappreciated in this draft.
17. Milwaukee Bucks- Montrezl Harrell, PF
For some reason, this selection makes a lot of sense to me. The Bucks need frontcourt help and Harrell has a chance to be an excellent rebounder in the pros. The Bucks have some guys up front, but I'm not sure they have a frontcourt player with the toughness that Harrell possesses. He's probably not going to be a star, but he's a violent dunker and a nice counter to what the Bucks currently have on the roster.
18. Houston Rockets- Rashad Vaughn, SG
Eh, Rashad Vaughn. I mean, I guess. He seems to be like a volume scorer who doesn't mind chucking up three points. Granted, he hit many of them in college, but I wonder if he's worth a first round pick or not. I've already accepted that Daryl Morey is smarter than I ever will be, so I should probably just assume I'm wrong. Players can improve defensively and Vaughn would definitely fit on this Rockets team in that he is a great shooter, but I just don't see him becoming worth a Top-20 draft pick.
19. Washington Wizards- Jerian Grant, PG
The Wizards need some more guard help and Grant can play both guard positions. As much as I love Ramon Sessions and Garrett Temple (I'm kidding, I HATE Garrett Temple), the Wizards could use another guard that is capable of scoring. Grant is a little older than the other NBA prospects, but I think he can at least be a reliable bench player. Now that I have said that, he'll be released in early October by whatever team drafts him in the second round.
20. Toronto Raptors- Trey Lyles, PF
There is no logical reason for Trey Lyles to fall this far. If he is available here, then the Raptors should jump on him. Lyles played out of position nearly all year for Kentucky. This affected the perception of him in this draft. He is not a small forward, he is a power forward, and the Raptors have skated by on James Johnson, Amir Williams and Patrick Patterson at the position over the last few years. If Lyles is gone, which I reasonably expect he will when the board shakes out, then I envision them taking a defensive-oriented small forward like Hollis-Jefferson or Justin Anderson. Speaking of Justin Anderson...
21. Dallas Mavericks- Justin Anderson, SG/SF
I'm not sure shooting guard or small forward is a popular position for the Mavericks to choose in the first round, but with Justin Anderson the Mavs may be having some minor flashbacks to how Josh Howard worked out for them late in the first round a few years ago...minus the drug issues of course. Virginia really struggled without Anderson last year when he was injured and it wasn't hard to see why. He's a much improved shooter and can really play defense. If all goes wrong for him on offense, then his defense will keep him on NBA rosters. He can play small forward and allow Chandler Parsons to play the power forward spot in smaller lineups.
22. Chicago Bulls- R.J. Hunter, SG
I didn't really love the Doug McDermott pick (or trade as the case may be) last year, so I'll just mock another good shooter I don't really like to the Bulls again. The Bulls could certainly use both of them, and I like McDermott more than Hunter. R.J. Hunter is a shooter who isn't really even that good at shooting. He averages 7 three-point attempts per game and makes 35.4% of them, including only making 30.5% of his three-point attempts this past year. That's...not great. He shoots almost 50% from two-point range, but half of his shots are from three-point range. Maybe it was the team around him at Georgia State which causes defenses to focus on him and him force shots, though I doubt it on a mid-major team that had Kevin Ware and Ryan Harrow. I don't expect Hunter to be in the NBA in 3-4 years.
23. Portland Trailblazers- Christian Wood, PF
If the Blazers lose LaMarcus Aldridge, then drafting a skinny kid from UNLV probably won't make them feel very good, but even if they do re-sign Aldridge then they will need more depth at the power forward position. I may be having Wood get drafted a bit early here, but he made dramatic improvement from his freshman to sophomore year at UNLV. I think Wood could be a contributor to the Blazers if they are patient enough with him. He's a modern big man, meaning he can shoot and block shots, but isn't at all a back-to-the-basket type of player. Unfortunately, he weighs like 46 pounds, so he needs to hit the weight room and then hope for some patience on the Blazers' part.
24. Cleveland Cavaliers- Rondae Hollis-Jefferson, SF
There's no telling who LeBron will pick here. I kid, I kid. In seriousness, Hollis-Jefferson is going to have a Tony Allen-like existence in the NBA. He's an excellent defender, and while his offensive game needs some help, he would fit in well with the Cavs due to his great defense and versatility. He's not going to be a star, but I think being like Tony Allen is his ceiling. I think I could handle that if I were the Cavs.
25. Memphis Grizzlies- Kelly Oubre, SG/SF
Oubre needed to stay in school one more year. I think if he had done that then he would have been a lottery pick for sure. As it is, he's probably going to be taken outside of the lottery. Bill Self should have chained Oubre in the basement and forced him to stay one more year. He couldn't crack the lineup for a portion of the season and never totally lived up to expectations. He has the potential to be that type of wing player the Grizzlies are in need of having though. When he cracked the starting lineup for the Jayhawks, he scored and showed what he is capable of. Still, one more year would have made him more ready for the NBA and increased his stock. As it is, I don't see him being drafted in the Top 15 and I don't think he's ready for the NBA at this point.
26. San Antonio Spurs- Tyus Jones, PG
It seems easy to just say the Spurs will pick an international player here. I won't cheat and pick an international player though. Terry Rozier will not be the pick here. I can just feel it because Rozier is too much of a wild card for Gregg Popovich. This is probably a fantasy pick for me, because I think Jones would fit in well with the Spurs. Jones will never have the ideal NBA body and athleticism, but he's a smart player who has shown he isn't afraid of big moments. I think he will make a really good backup point guard for a contending team. I question if he will be able to get in the lane as a pro like he did in college and I think being a poor man's Tony Parker (albeit being a better shooter than Parker was at 19 years of age) is probably Jones' ceiling.
27. Los Angeles Lakers- Delon Wright, PG/SG
Delon Wright is the typical guy coming out of college who is going to fall not due to his skill set, but because he is older than most prospects and doesn't have the ceiling most other draft prospects have. I have a hard time figuring him out, because I don't know if he will adapt very well to the NBA game and thrive or be overmatched. His improvement from year-to-year at Utah leads me to believe Wright can be a bench contributor in the NBA, but he has to continue to improve his shooting and get used to not being the main facilitator on offense. The first round may be a bit early for him.
28. Boston Celtics- Robert Upshaw, C
Anybody but a Syracuse center. That's all I ask. Again, I don't think the Celtics will be making this pick, but if they did then this is an area where taking a troubled talent like Upshaw may make sense. After all, the Celtics have wasted picks on big men like Fab Melo and Colton Iverson, so they may as well spend one on a player who has actual talent, yet is a dipshit and keeps getting kicked off teams. The shot-blocking talent is there and the Celtics desperately need a rim protector. If Upshaw isn't worth the risk here in the first round, then the Celtics may choose to take him in the second round where he doesn't have a guaranteed contract.
29. Brooklyn Nets- Cliff Alexander, PF
Alexander was a highly touted player coming into his freshman year at Kansas. Then he ran into some issues trying to get time on a deep Kansas team and also ended up on not playing in the NCAA Tournament due to eligibility issues. Rest assured, he has tremendous potential and at the #29 spot in the first round the Nets should take a player with potential to help out on their front line. In 17.6 minutes as a freshman, Alexander averaged 7.1 points, 5.3 rebounds and 1.3 blocks. He may never be any good in the NBA, and I hate drafting players on potential, but for a Nets team with salary issues taking a talent like Alexander late in the first round is a good risk.
30. Golden State Warriors- Olivier Hanlan, PG/SG
This is admittedly a shot in the dark. Of course, most of these picks in my mock are shots in the dark. The Warriors could use another combo guard with Barbosa and Livingston both becoming free agents (I believe) and I think Hanlan is an underrated prospect. Look at his stats. If he puts those up at a school that isn't Boston College then I think he would be considered a first round pick. He is slightly turnover-prone, but he can get to the rim and since the Warriors like to spell Curry for a longer period of time (compared to other star players) then a scorer combo guard like Hanlan will fit in well.
Feel free to mock my picks after they are all wrong or a big trade ruins my entire mock draft.
It's tough, because I want my picks to be correct, but I also understand if I follow the mock drafts out there then my picks will end up being wrong. Mock drafts are very rarely extremely accurate. So I am going to miss on some picks because I didn't follow the mocks, while I may hit on other picks based on how my mock is falling. Guessing is fun until you want your guesses to be correct.
1. Minnesota Timberwolves- Karl-Anthony Towns, PF
Here is my deal with this pick. Try to hold on to the roller coaster of my opinion. This is the right pick. Minnesota is the perfect place for Jahlil Okafor, so this is a big loss for him. Okafor needs to be paired initially with a rim protector and I have a huge man-crush on Gorgui Dieng. I think he would be the perfect guy to pair with Okafor. Towns is probably the right pick here, but if I were the Timberwolves I would be tempted to go with a player who has lower potential, but has a great offensive game to match up with Andrew Wiggins developing skill set. That's Okafor. Towns is an upside pick, a pick for good defense and maybe the right one. I would choose Okafor. I'm not mad at them for taking Towns because it makes sense as well. It's not the wrong pick, just not the pick I would make.
2. Los Angeles Lakers- Jahlil Okafor, C
It's tempting to go with D'Angelo Russell here, but if you look at his numbers in college, he tended to struggle going up against good teams. Of course, there wasn't many other great players on the Ohio State squad to help Russell, so he can be forgiven for that. The two big concerns about Okafor are overblown in my opinion. Conditioning and defense. He's a 19 year kid, so his conditioning issues are overblown. Many true centers would have conditioning issues at the age of 19. It's how it goes, but the evolution of the NBA away from a back-to-the-basket center has sort of covered up for this. "True" back-to-the-basket centers aren't in peak physical shape at 19 years of age. He did play 30 minutes per game at Duke, so it's not like he hasn't played bigger minutes. Defense is an issue, but defense can be taught. Again, Okafor is 19 years old and hasn't had to play defense because he's so good on offense. I don't think he will be a great defensive player, but he will end up being good enough. Pairing him with a shot blocker initially is a good move. That means, don't pair with Julius Randle. Oh well. Okafor has some professional post moves and he is an excellent passer. The Duke offense ran through him, but it didn't have to go THROUGH him if that makes sense. He was effective in college when not taking shots and still getting touches every time down the floor. I apologize for the length, but I have strong feelings about Okafor. He may not be Hakeem Olajuwon, but he's a center who will be able to score the basketball in the post. Those are hard to find. I know he seems to lack athleticism and upside, but he can play basketball.
3. Philadelphia 76ers- D'Angelo Russell, PG/SG
Here is where things get shaky. I have no idea who the 76ers may pick. Would they pick Okafor if he fell to them? No, because then the Celtics would trade up for Okafor (right?????????). I'm going with consensus here because the 76ers need guards. I know Sam Hinkie is "accumulating assets" but Tony Wroten, Hollis Thompson, and JaKarr Sampson are currently projected to be among the players at the guard spot for the 76ers. They need guards and though I do have some reserves about Russell that I can't pinpoint exactly, he's the sort of Steph Curry-type (not in terms of shooting ability) which teams are going to covet. The Sixers could take Emmanuel Mudiay and shock the world, but from the trade of Michael Carter-Williams I think it's clear they had their fill of taller point guards.
4. New York Knicks- Kristaps Porzingis, PF/C
Now it gets even fuzzier. If the Knicks even keep this pick, who will they select? It seems the Knicks value versatility and Kristaps Porzingis appears to be versatile from every scouting report I have read about him. He can protect the rim and allow Carmelo to play the power forward position. Of course, everything I know about him is based on the hype train that has been running through the Interwebs and I have never actually seen him play. I hope he fails miserably because his name is hard to spell. Also, Knicks fans are not going to like the idea of the team taking a foreign-born player as Frederic Weis is still fresh in their minds. I'm sure Chad Ford loves Kristaps Porzingis. Indeed, he does. Ford thinks every team should draft Porzingis. I'm sure Ford will be outraged if Porzingis goes anywhere past #7. Based on Ford liking Porzingis I'll go ahead and say this is a bad pick for the Knicks.
5. Orlando Magic- Justice Winslow, SF
The Magic just traded Luke Ridnour yesterday. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR THIS PICK? I may have made this pick simply because I want to see Oladipo, Payton, and Winslow play together. I am throwing Willie Cauley-Stein in here as a wild card selection. The Magic need a rim protector and they may as well just admit that drafting Aaron Gordon probably will end up being a huge mistake. Just give up on him prematurely, that's the ticket. I think it would be interesting to see Cauley-Stein in this spot, but he has less offensive game than Aaron Gordon did coming out of college, so I can't see the Magic choosing an athletic dude without any semblance of offensive game twice in the lottery. Winslow will be one of the three best players in this draft. I believe that. I think he has a brighter future than Okafor has. He can guard multiple positions, is a good shooter and a great competitor (as long as the refs continue to allow him to run over the opposition without calling a charge).
6. Sacramento Kings- Emmanuel Mudiay, PG
George Karl likes his point guards and Emmanuel Mudiay plays the position of point guard, so that seems like an ideal fit. I think Karl is going to want to take a point guard considered a talent like Mudiay is considered to be, simply so he has someone running the offense Karl wants to run effectively. I do not like Emmanuel Mudiay all that much. He's a slasher who is a bad foul shooter, he's not a great shooter, and he has people around him who give him mediocre advice (I get going to China to play for money reasons, but I think attending SMU would have been the best choice). I'm not a fan, but Mudiay has the "upside" NBA teams like, so he goes #6 in the draft.
7. Denver Nuggets- Mario Hezonja, SF
This is another foreign-born player that I don't know very much about. I know he is confident in his abilities and the Nuggets need a player at his position. He supposedly has the personality required to in tough situations, and unlike some foreign-born players, has had success overseas prior to coming to the United States. I wish I knew more about him. I know he seems to be confident and that is something the Nuggets can build on, right?
8. Detroit Pistons- Sam Dekker, SF
Obviously these are all guesses, but I'm really guessing here that the Pistons would favor Dekker's athletic ability and shooting over the "upside" of Stanley Johnson and any other player who conceivably could be considered to be a smarter pick. I'm a little torn on Dekker. I see the potential and he had a great NCAA Tournament. I think this would be a little early to take him though. Stan Van Gundy will value Dekker's height and ability to play the stretch-four spot with Drummond at center. Maybe he's the American version of Hedo Turkoglu. At worse, Dekker can play small forward and Ilaysova can play the four spot, which means the Pistons still have height and outside shooting to surround Drummond with.
9. Charlotte HornCats- Stanley Johnson, SF
I hear the HornCats need shooting. This is probably why every mock draft but a few have Devin Booker mocked in this spot. I'm going in a different direction though. I think the HornCats are going to go with Stanley Johnson, even with the trade of Gerald Henderson and Noah Vonleh. I do not like Stanley Johnson, as I feel he is more potential than anything else. He could turn into something great and with Michael Jordan calling out his team's talent level recently it makes sense to me the team doesn't go with a guy who is just a great shooter like Devin Booker is.
10. Miami Heat- Willie Cauley-Stein, C
Cauley-Stein is an absolute freak of an athlete. I love watching play, but also have no clue what to do with him. He's a center, but he can guard multiple positions, but he also has very, very little offensive game. That offensive game could come in time though and this is a BPA pick since it doesn't appear the Heat need another center with Hassan Whiteside breaking out. That being said, Cauley-Stein is also insurance against Whiteside wanting to be overpaid next summer (and who wouldn't want to be overpaid?) and Whiteside ending up being a one year wonder.
11. Indiana Pacers- Cameron Payne, PG
I don't think the Pacers will be picking in this spot, because I believe they will do what they can to move up. This is another pick I'm torn on. If the mock draft goes the way I have it going, I don't know if the Pacers try to get Myles Turner in this spot. I probably don't like Devin Booker more than other teams do, so I should mock him here. Larry Bird has seen how Lillard and Payton went from small schools to success in the NBA and the biggest knock against Payne is that he comes from a school that isn't huge. I don't think this will matter to Bird. It doesn't matter to me either. Payne poured in 23-7-4 against Xavier and 23-4-6 and 20-6-10 against Belmont. Those were pretty good teams last year. He can be a starter in the NBA, despite "only" playing for Murray State.
12. Utah Jazz- Frank Kaminsky, PF/C
It's so hard not to mock Frank Kaminsky in this spot. I in no way think Kaminsky is the best talent available, but I do believe he fits what the Jazz want to do. I probably am incorrect in having Kaminsky fall this far. Adding him to a lineup featuring Derrick Favors and Rudy Gobert would be a problem for other teams, especially if Gordon Hayward is playing the small forward spot in this lineup. The Jazz need a big man off the bench to shoot and provide a different look. I don't think Trey Lyles is that guy and it's too early to reach for a "true" point guard. Kaminksy will be a productive shooter in the NBA, but I'm not sure he'll be more than that.
13. Phoenix Suns- Myles Turner, C
It's hard to fairly evaluate Myles Turner because he played for Rick Barnes. Rick Barnes is not a good head coach, so is it Barnes' fault that Turner didn't quite turn into the freshmen he was supposed to be? Turner runs like he's 50 years old, but he can shoot the three-point shot* and block shots. I warned the Suns against drafting Alex Len a few years ago, so it's clear they don't listen to me. Myles Turner can block shots though, so hopefully he'll stop hanging around the perimeter in the NBA and get on the low block where I think he has the best chance of succeeding. To me, Turner is a stretch four that isn't good at running the floor, an okay shooter and he's sort of soft (in my opinion). It's a wasted pick, but I can see why the Suns would make it.
*He CAN, but he only shot 27% and I don't see any reason that he should be hanging around the three-point line as he is already 240 pounds and his body should fill out more as he ages.
14. Oklahoma City Thunder- Devin Booker, SG
Another tough choice here. The Thunder were giving regular minutes to Anthony Morrow last year and Morrow has one skill, shooting the three-point shot. Why not take the best three-point shooter in the draft and see if he can turn into something more than that along the way? The reason I say it is a tough choice is there are guys with higher ceilings available who could very well turn out to be great NBA players in time (Lyles, Oubre), inside guys who can provide rebounding and toughness (Harrell, Portis), as well as Justin Anderson who is a great all-around player. The Thunder needed bench help for most of the year last year and Devin Booker at worst will be an excellent shooter, maybe another Anthony Morrow.
15. Atlanta Hawks- Bobby Portis, PF
I'm assuming the Hawks are the Spurs of the East Coast. They like guys who play defense, know their role and can do several things well (of course, who doesn't like that?). There is no way the Hawks keep Carroll and Millsap, so they are going to need some more frontcourt depth. The Cavs seemed to kill them on the boards in the playoffs, while Portis isn't ever going to be accused of not providing enough energy and effort. It seems Portis fits what the Hawks are looking for in a player, though again, there are guys with higher upsides available. If the Hawks are wanting to go in that direction then I think Kelly Oubre or even R.J. Hunter could be the pick.
16. Boston Celtics- Kevin Looney, PF
The good news is the Celtics have a lot of options because they have quite a few holes in the lineup. Their whole starting lineup seems to consist of guys you would want on your team, but possibly not starting for a playoff team. I don't think the Celtics will be making this pick in this spot, but if they do, then there is a glaring need at small forward and power forward. I'm neutral on Looney. He's a good rebounder and is a good scorer, but he's also skinny. Weight can be put on and I think if the Celtics make this pick then they could go with a guy who I think has been slightly underappreciated in this draft.
17. Milwaukee Bucks- Montrezl Harrell, PF
For some reason, this selection makes a lot of sense to me. The Bucks need frontcourt help and Harrell has a chance to be an excellent rebounder in the pros. The Bucks have some guys up front, but I'm not sure they have a frontcourt player with the toughness that Harrell possesses. He's probably not going to be a star, but he's a violent dunker and a nice counter to what the Bucks currently have on the roster.
18. Houston Rockets- Rashad Vaughn, SG
Eh, Rashad Vaughn. I mean, I guess. He seems to be like a volume scorer who doesn't mind chucking up three points. Granted, he hit many of them in college, but I wonder if he's worth a first round pick or not. I've already accepted that Daryl Morey is smarter than I ever will be, so I should probably just assume I'm wrong. Players can improve defensively and Vaughn would definitely fit on this Rockets team in that he is a great shooter, but I just don't see him becoming worth a Top-20 draft pick.
19. Washington Wizards- Jerian Grant, PG
The Wizards need some more guard help and Grant can play both guard positions. As much as I love Ramon Sessions and Garrett Temple (I'm kidding, I HATE Garrett Temple), the Wizards could use another guard that is capable of scoring. Grant is a little older than the other NBA prospects, but I think he can at least be a reliable bench player. Now that I have said that, he'll be released in early October by whatever team drafts him in the second round.
20. Toronto Raptors- Trey Lyles, PF
There is no logical reason for Trey Lyles to fall this far. If he is available here, then the Raptors should jump on him. Lyles played out of position nearly all year for Kentucky. This affected the perception of him in this draft. He is not a small forward, he is a power forward, and the Raptors have skated by on James Johnson, Amir Williams and Patrick Patterson at the position over the last few years. If Lyles is gone, which I reasonably expect he will when the board shakes out, then I envision them taking a defensive-oriented small forward like Hollis-Jefferson or Justin Anderson. Speaking of Justin Anderson...
21. Dallas Mavericks- Justin Anderson, SG/SF
I'm not sure shooting guard or small forward is a popular position for the Mavericks to choose in the first round, but with Justin Anderson the Mavs may be having some minor flashbacks to how Josh Howard worked out for them late in the first round a few years ago...minus the drug issues of course. Virginia really struggled without Anderson last year when he was injured and it wasn't hard to see why. He's a much improved shooter and can really play defense. If all goes wrong for him on offense, then his defense will keep him on NBA rosters. He can play small forward and allow Chandler Parsons to play the power forward spot in smaller lineups.
22. Chicago Bulls- R.J. Hunter, SG
I didn't really love the Doug McDermott pick (or trade as the case may be) last year, so I'll just mock another good shooter I don't really like to the Bulls again. The Bulls could certainly use both of them, and I like McDermott more than Hunter. R.J. Hunter is a shooter who isn't really even that good at shooting. He averages 7 three-point attempts per game and makes 35.4% of them, including only making 30.5% of his three-point attempts this past year. That's...not great. He shoots almost 50% from two-point range, but half of his shots are from three-point range. Maybe it was the team around him at Georgia State which causes defenses to focus on him and him force shots, though I doubt it on a mid-major team that had Kevin Ware and Ryan Harrow. I don't expect Hunter to be in the NBA in 3-4 years.
23. Portland Trailblazers- Christian Wood, PF
If the Blazers lose LaMarcus Aldridge, then drafting a skinny kid from UNLV probably won't make them feel very good, but even if they do re-sign Aldridge then they will need more depth at the power forward position. I may be having Wood get drafted a bit early here, but he made dramatic improvement from his freshman to sophomore year at UNLV. I think Wood could be a contributor to the Blazers if they are patient enough with him. He's a modern big man, meaning he can shoot and block shots, but isn't at all a back-to-the-basket type of player. Unfortunately, he weighs like 46 pounds, so he needs to hit the weight room and then hope for some patience on the Blazers' part.
24. Cleveland Cavaliers- Rondae Hollis-Jefferson, SF
There's no telling who LeBron will pick here. I kid, I kid. In seriousness, Hollis-Jefferson is going to have a Tony Allen-like existence in the NBA. He's an excellent defender, and while his offensive game needs some help, he would fit in well with the Cavs due to his great defense and versatility. He's not going to be a star, but I think being like Tony Allen is his ceiling. I think I could handle that if I were the Cavs.
25. Memphis Grizzlies- Kelly Oubre, SG/SF
Oubre needed to stay in school one more year. I think if he had done that then he would have been a lottery pick for sure. As it is, he's probably going to be taken outside of the lottery. Bill Self should have chained Oubre in the basement and forced him to stay one more year. He couldn't crack the lineup for a portion of the season and never totally lived up to expectations. He has the potential to be that type of wing player the Grizzlies are in need of having though. When he cracked the starting lineup for the Jayhawks, he scored and showed what he is capable of. Still, one more year would have made him more ready for the NBA and increased his stock. As it is, I don't see him being drafted in the Top 15 and I don't think he's ready for the NBA at this point.
26. San Antonio Spurs- Tyus Jones, PG
It seems easy to just say the Spurs will pick an international player here. I won't cheat and pick an international player though. Terry Rozier will not be the pick here. I can just feel it because Rozier is too much of a wild card for Gregg Popovich. This is probably a fantasy pick for me, because I think Jones would fit in well with the Spurs. Jones will never have the ideal NBA body and athleticism, but he's a smart player who has shown he isn't afraid of big moments. I think he will make a really good backup point guard for a contending team. I question if he will be able to get in the lane as a pro like he did in college and I think being a poor man's Tony Parker (albeit being a better shooter than Parker was at 19 years of age) is probably Jones' ceiling.
27. Los Angeles Lakers- Delon Wright, PG/SG
Delon Wright is the typical guy coming out of college who is going to fall not due to his skill set, but because he is older than most prospects and doesn't have the ceiling most other draft prospects have. I have a hard time figuring him out, because I don't know if he will adapt very well to the NBA game and thrive or be overmatched. His improvement from year-to-year at Utah leads me to believe Wright can be a bench contributor in the NBA, but he has to continue to improve his shooting and get used to not being the main facilitator on offense. The first round may be a bit early for him.
28. Boston Celtics- Robert Upshaw, C
Anybody but a Syracuse center. That's all I ask. Again, I don't think the Celtics will be making this pick, but if they did then this is an area where taking a troubled talent like Upshaw may make sense. After all, the Celtics have wasted picks on big men like Fab Melo and Colton Iverson, so they may as well spend one on a player who has actual talent, yet is a dipshit and keeps getting kicked off teams. The shot-blocking talent is there and the Celtics desperately need a rim protector. If Upshaw isn't worth the risk here in the first round, then the Celtics may choose to take him in the second round where he doesn't have a guaranteed contract.
29. Brooklyn Nets- Cliff Alexander, PF
Alexander was a highly touted player coming into his freshman year at Kansas. Then he ran into some issues trying to get time on a deep Kansas team and also ended up on not playing in the NCAA Tournament due to eligibility issues. Rest assured, he has tremendous potential and at the #29 spot in the first round the Nets should take a player with potential to help out on their front line. In 17.6 minutes as a freshman, Alexander averaged 7.1 points, 5.3 rebounds and 1.3 blocks. He may never be any good in the NBA, and I hate drafting players on potential, but for a Nets team with salary issues taking a talent like Alexander late in the first round is a good risk.
30. Golden State Warriors- Olivier Hanlan, PG/SG
This is admittedly a shot in the dark. Of course, most of these picks in my mock are shots in the dark. The Warriors could use another combo guard with Barbosa and Livingston both becoming free agents (I believe) and I think Hanlan is an underrated prospect. Look at his stats. If he puts those up at a school that isn't Boston College then I think he would be considered a first round pick. He is slightly turnover-prone, but he can get to the rim and since the Warriors like to spell Curry for a longer period of time (compared to other star players) then a scorer combo guard like Hanlan will fit in well.
Feel free to mock my picks after they are all wrong or a big trade ruins my entire mock draft.
Monday, June 22, 2015
7 comments Reviewing Chad Ford's 2003 NBA Draft Grades (The Point at Which His Obsession With International Players Became a Joke)
I enjoy reviewing Mel Kiper's draft grades after a few years to see what he was incredibly wrong and incredibly right about. I also like to mock the grades he gives to a draft and mock the comments he makes about each player. He is an expert, so it's fun to see what an "expert" like him thought of a draft. Usually, Mel just gives each team a high grade. So I figure I would go through Chad Ford's draft grades as well. Guess what? Chad Ford gives every team high grades too. For the 2003 draft he gave the lowest grade as a "C-" while giving 19 "A" and "B" grades. I guess everyone got a ribbon in this draft too...except not really. There were some really bad drafts in 2003. But, of course, in an effort to make a mockery of draft grades that are already a mockery, Chad Ford didn't pan any team's draft. Like I say about Mel Kiper, it's better to be wrong while being positive than to be negative about a player and be wrong. No one remember when Chad Ford said Brandon Hunter would be a good pick (okay, people remember his love for Darko), but they will remember if he had said Carmelo Anthony would be a bust. Take no chances in giving your opinion and you will be rewarded.
After 58 picks and several trades Thursday night, ESPN Insider Chad Ford handed out his draft-night grades:
For an organization that loves to embrace debate, the draft experts with ESPN certainly stay pretty vanilla with their draft grades. Not that I'm complaining that Chad Ford doesn't embrace debate, but no team did well below average in the draft? Ford even gives "incomplete" grades instead of handing out a "D" or "F." Thankfully no one got their feelings hurt.
Atlanta Hawks
Round 1: Boris Diaw, SG, France (No. 21) Round 2: Travis Hansen, G, BYU (No. 37)
Boris Diaw was a shooting guard coming out of France. Interesting.
Grade: A-
Hansen only played two years in the NBA, though Diaw was traded for Joe Johnson, which means drafting Boris Diaw is how the Hawks went about overpaying Joe Johnson. That's a lot of information, but this isn't an "A-" draft.
Boston Celtics
Round 1: Marcus Banks, G, UNLV (No. 13) Round 1: Kendrick Perkins, C, Ozen HS (No. 27) Round 2: Brandon Hunter, F, Ohio (No. 56)
I promised that I'd give the Celtics an "F" if they took Banks and Perkins at No. 16 and No. 20. They traded down for Perkins and got him in a more reasonable range, so I upped the grade a bit.
For upped the grade "a bit" from an "F" to a "C." A fucking "C" is upping the grade "a bit." For those who haven't ever attended any type of school above elementary school (that would be no one), if a teacher/professor ups your grade "a bit" from an "F" then you probably aren't expecting for your failing work to all of a sudden become average work. But hey, Chad Ford was so impressed the Celtics got Kendrick Perkins seven picks later than he expected it moved them up two letter grades. Not that Ford makes things up as he goes along of course.
I like Banks' toughness and his ability to get to the basket, but I'm not sure he's that big an upgrade over J.R. Bremer.
I'm going to leave this here with a comment. This is like saying, "I like the taste of cat shit on a sandwich, but I'm not sure it tastes better than horseshit on a bagel." Either option sucks.
In the end, I wonder if the Celtics will get any better this year because of the draft.
Grade: C
One would think if Ford wasn't sure a team got better in the draft that he isn't grading an average draft. One would think absolutely wrong. Apparently a draft where a team doesn't get better is an average draft. Actually, it probably is an average draft from a macro level in that teams on average probably don't get a ton better based on their draft, but that's not how grades for the draft are supposed to work. It's not a "C" draft if the best you can do with two first round picks is Kendrick Perkins.
Chicago Bulls
Round 1: Kirk Hinrich, G, Kansas (No. 7)
Round 2: Mario Austin, F, Mississippi St. (No. 36)
Round 2: Tommy Smith, F, Arizona St. (No. 53)
The Kirk Hinrich pick is a bit of a head-scratcher. I love Hinrich, but I'm not sure how he fits with Jamal Crawford. They needed a bigger two guard who could score and defend. They passed on Mickael Pietrus, a player who could've given them that. Still, Hinrich's versatile enough to play the point and the two.
Ah yes, the days when Jamal Crawford and Kirk Hinrich had to fit in together.
I like Austin in the second round, though I wonder if he'll ever see the light of day behind Tyson Chandler and Eddy Curry.
Well, it was hard to see anything behind Eddy Curry. You know, because he was so fat. Being behind him was never recommended.
Neither second round pick made the team and Ford gave this draft a "B-." This is sort of a high grade for a team whose first round pick he didn't particularly like.
Cleveland Cavaliers
Round 1: LeBron James, G, St. Vincent-St. Mary HS (No. 1)
Round 2: Jason Kapono, F, UCLA (No. 31)
They get an "A" for LeBron, but I thought they really passed up on a chance to get better in the post. I think Jerome Beasley was a real sleeper here and would've been a nice complement to Carlos Boozer.
Not that Jason Kapono was the greatest player ever, but the only impact Jerome Beasley made in the NBA was being mentioned several times in the draft grades that Chad Ford gave out.
Grade: A-
You draft a Hall of Famer (even if by default), then you get an "A" in my book. What's annoying to me is how Ford criticizes the pick of Kapono. To find a guy in the second round who has one elite skill, that's a win in my opinion.
Dallas Mavericks
Round 1: Josh Howard, F, Wake Forest (No. 29)
They got a steal with Josh Howard late in the first. He's the type of all-purpose guy who's thrived in Dallas the past few years.
Credit where credit is due here. Howard was really good for a while. But.................Ford just couldn't quite put aside his love for international players all the way.
I'm a little surprised they left more physical post players such as Mario Austin, Zaur Pachulia and Malick Badiane on the board,
Chad Ford is like, "Sure, the Mavericks made a really selection, but..............you know there are so many international players who we know NOTHING ABOUT and isn't it more fun to draft those guys and pretend they will develop over time, as opposed to drafting a guy the team thinks will help the team win games now?
Grade: B
Detroit Pistons
Round 1: Darko Milicic, F, Serbia-Montenegro (No. 2)
Round 1: Carlos Delfino, G, Italy (No. 25)
Round 2: Andres Gliniadakis, C, Greece (No. 58)
This is a dream draft for Chad Ford. The Pistons had three picks and took zero American players. I don't have to tell you this draft got a "A+" do I? It did. If there were a grade higher than an "A+" then that is the grade Chad Ford would have given the Pistons draft in 2003.
How many teams with the best record in their conference end up with the best big man in the draft and a draft-night steal in Carlos Delfino? By now, you know about Darko, but Delfino will also be important down the road.
Carlos Delfino wasn't a bad player, that is true. But back to Darko...remember how much Chad Ford loved Darko Milicic? It bordered on obsession. What's funny is Ford didn't get his reputation for over-loving foreign-born players just from Darko, he loved nearly every international player because so much wasn't known about them. How much fun is that? If Chad Ford played "Let's Make a Deal" then he would always choose the prize behind the closed door because he has NO IDEA what's behind that door. Not knowing what is behind the door is so much better than the prize he currently has.
Gliniadakis was a nice pickup at the end of the draft. He's a 7-footer who can actually play. The Pistons will leave him in Greece for a few years and bring him over when he's ready.
Ford writes something like, "Leave him overseas until he's ready" in some variation many times in these draft grades. It's like he thinks these international players are chicken tenders you just put in the oven to cook and then they come out ready to be NBA All-Stars. Gliniadakis did come over when he was ready and then immediately got sent back to whence he came. He's still playing in Romania by the way.
Grade: A+
Houston Rockets
Round 1: No pick
Round 2: Malick Badiane, F, Germany (No. 44)
The Rockets made the most of their only pick. The team knows a thing or two about African players and they believe Badiane could be a force in the paint someday.
Chad Ford doesn't even need to know if an international player actually knows what a basketball looks like. Just look at that player and think about how great he could be DOWN THE ROAD SOMEDAY. This draft got a "B+" grade and I'm guessing Ford was tempted to give it an "A++++". I'm not sure Badiane has gotten closer to America than playing in the D-league for one year. But hey, it's a "B+" draft!
Indiana Pacers
Round 1: No pick
Round 2: James Jones, F, Miami (No. 49)
Jones is a nice second rounder. He has size, athleticism and a sweet stroke. But do the Pacers need another small forward?
Grade: B
See? Draft an American player and that team gets knocked from a "B+" to a "B" grade. If his name were Jamemarko Jonesinfino then there's a chance this is an "A" draft. The Pacers made the mistake of drafting a player with a unique skill he can use the NBA. They could have used this pick on a player that no one knew anything about, but who would marinate overseas and then come over to America and totally dominate.
Los Angeles Clippers
Round 1: Chris Kaman, C, Central Michigan (No. 6)
Round 2: Sofoklis Schortsanitis, F, Greece (No. 34)
The Kaman pick makes sense at one level. They know they're going to lose Michael Olowokandi and they're pretty sure that free agents won't be flocking to sign with them. But is Kaman a good fit? He doesn't want to play there and he doesn't fit their style of play.
No worries. The Clippers drafted an international player in the second round. Guess what? Chad Ford LOVES this player I haven't ever heard of and who never actually played in the NBA.
Their second-round pick was a steal at No. 34. Will Schortsanitis replace Elton Brand if he bolts this summer? More likely, he'll head back to Greece for another year or two before trying to bruise and pummel the NBA.
Yes, will Schortsanitis come over and immediately start playing at a high level in the NBA. Logically, he could do this since he was 18 years old at the time and had never played in the NBA before. How could he not come to the NBA and immediately take Elton Brand's place?
The absurdity of Chad Ford's love for international players can not be understated.
Grade: B
Memphis Grizzlies
Round 1: Troy Bell, G, Boston College (No. 16)
Round 1: Dahntay Jones, G, Duke (No. 20)
I can't fault the Grizzlies for liking Troy Bell and Dahntay Jones. They're both proven players and great athletes who can contribute immediately. However, they gave up two first-round picks to draft, essentially, two second-round picks. I don't agree with that. I think Bell will be a nice addition if he can crack the point guard rotation. If he can't, what was the point?
Grade: C-
The Grizzlies reached for two players in the first round and it only got them knocked down to a "C-." What would it take to get a "D" from Chad Ford? Drafting three American players in the first round who were projected to be undrafted? What would it take to get an "F"? Spending three first round picks on three guys who never actually played basketball at any level? Even then, if one of those guys was an international player then that team's draft would probably get a "D-."
Miami Heat
Round 1: Dwyane Wade, G, Marquette (No. 5)
Round 2: Jerome Beasley, C, North Dakota (No. 33)
It's tough to criticize Pat Riley for passing on Lampe when 24 other teams did the same thing.
It's also tough to criticize Riley because Lampe sucked terribly bad and fell in the draft for a very good reason.
Grade: A-
Any draft where a Hall of Famer is selected is an automatic "A" for me. This is a rare instance where Chad Ford gives a team too low of a grade.
Milwaukee Bucks
Round 1: T.J. Ford, G, Texas (No. 8)
Round 2: Szymon Szewczyk, F, Germany (No. 35)
If Gary Payton and Sam Cassell don't come back, it could be a good pick. But with the franchise for sale, will the 6-foot point guard turn this team around? I'm just not sold.
I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE CHAD! The franchise was for sale and you aren't sold on T.J. Ford turning the team around. What if his name was Teejay Fjoryd and he was a skinny guy from Iceland? Would you have liked him more if that were the case?
Szymon Szewczyk is a nice player to get for future use. He'll head back to Germany, but in another year or two he could come back and be a force.
What is it with Chad Ford saying all these guys need "a year or two" overseas and then can come over and dominate? It's never "3-4 years" or "hey, he can come over now and play well," but Ford always gives the international player 1-2 years overseas and then the absolute domination begins.
Grade: C+
Minnesota Timberwolves
Round 1: Ndudi Ebi, F, Westbury Christian HS (No. 26)
Round 2: Rick Rickert, C, Minnesota (No. 55)
Remember the time when the Timberwolves would draft in the mid-20's and not just because they had traded for a pick in that area of the draft?
The Wolves passed on some talent that could help them right now (Josh Howard, Mario Austin) to take a kid that's at least three years away. Ndudi Ebi has the upside to be worth the risk down the road. But for a team like the Wolves -- who need to make that next step in the postseason -- Ebi gives zero relief. Ditto for Rick Rickert, who already gets the official label of draft bust.
Grade: Incomplete
Ford can't even give a failing grade. He gives an "incomplete" grade. Just give a "D" or an "F." Why the fuck would he give an "incomplete" grade for a draft that is complete?
New Jersey Nets
Round 1: Zoran Planinic, G, Croatia (No. 22)
The great thing about Planinic is his versatility -- taking Planinic is like drafting three guys. He has the experience and the basketball skill to make an impact in year one.
Drafting Planinic is like drafting three players. Basically, the Nets had three first round draft picks during the 2003 NBA Draft. What a nice luxury to be able to spend three picks on just one player. I bet Planinic was a real stud in the NBA. (looks up Planinic's numbers in the NBA)
Oh, he never averaged more than 5 points a game and averaged more personal fouls per game than rebounds, assists, or steals. God, how terrible would Planinic have been if drafting him had not been like drafting three guys? More importantly, what kind of versatility did Planinic display? He was good at missing shots (40.5% career FG), good at committing fouls (1.6 fouls per game in 10.7 minutes per game), and wasn't even a good foul shooter (67.7% FT).
Definitely not an "A-" draft from the Nets.
Grade: A-
New York Knicks
Round 1: Mike Sweetney, F, Georgetown (No. 9)
Round 2: Maciej Lampe, F, Poland (No. 30)
Round 2: Slavko Vranes, F, Serbia-Montenegro (No. 39)
But landing the other guy you thought about taking at No. 9, Maciej Lampe, was a huge draft steal. I've seen Lampe play enough to know that his slide wasn't warranted. Lots of teams dropped the ball on him. If he can work out his contract issues with Real Madrid, he'll make Knicks fans happy.
Knicks fans were happy when Lampe didn't play for the team anymore. The same can be said for Sweetney as well. I like how Chad Ford is so confident that Maciej Lampe was going to be a great player. Chad Ford KNEW that Lampe's slide wasn't warranted. So much confidence from a guy who couldn't give a "D" or "F" grade in these draft grades.
Grade: A-
Now, THIS is an "F" draft if there ever is one.
New Orleans Hornets
Round 1: David West, F, Xavier (No. 18)
Round 2: James Lang, C, Central Park Christian HS (No. 48)
David West is a solid pick. He'll contribute a little in year one, get some rebounds and block some shots. He's a poor man's P.J. Brown. They didn't shoot for the moon on this pick, nor did they stick out their necks.
David West was better than a poor man's P.J. Brown. I like how Ford graded this draft. Good effort, good job. Ah, who the fuck knows how to grade it? Here's a "C+" grade.
Orlando Magic
Round 1: Reece Gaines, G, Louisville (No. 15)
Round 2: Zaur Pachulia, F, Turkey (No. 42)
Round 2: Keith Bogans, G, Kentucky (No. 43)
This is the best draft the Magic have had in years. Gaines was the guy they wanted at No. 15 and he's a perfect fit in Doc Rivers' system. Landing Zaur Pachulia in round two was another big coup.
Grade: A
Bogans has had a pretty good career. Reece Gaines was not a fit for Doc Rivers' system. Maybe Chad Ford thought Gaines was from overseas. Even if Zaza and Bogans had decent careers this is not the best draft the Magic had in years (and if so, that's not saying much) and it is not an "A" draft.
Philadelphia 76ers
Round 2: Willie Green, G, Detroit (No. 41)
Round 2: Kyle Korver, F, Creighton (No. 51)
Kyle Korver may be one of the better shooters in the draft, but he can't create his own shoot and can't play a lick of defense.
It's the middle of the second round. To find one of the better shooters in the draft in the second round, in other words finding a guy with an elite skill, is not a bad thing. What else does Ford expect to be available in the middle of the 2nd round?
Grade: C-
We all know soft, white guys are deemed as having a high ceiling if they come from Poland. Unfortunately, Korver came from Creighton, so he has NO projectability and Chad Ford is disgusted at his existence in this draft. Why couldn't Korver just become an accountant like any good self-respecting white guy from America who played college basketball and could shoot the ball well would do?
Portland Trail Blazers
Round 1: Travis Outlaw, F, Starkville HS (No. 23)
Round 2: Nedzad Sinanovic, C, Bosnia-Herzegovina (No. 54)
Travis Outlaw may be a lottery pick after a couple of years in school, but right now he's a second-rounder. He can't contribute and won't for years. Meanwhile, the Blazers passed on several guys (Lampe, Barbosa, Pachulia, Cook) with just as much upside.
Grade: C-
The Trailblazers didn't have a great draft, but since when does Chad Ford have a problem with a player taking a few years to contribute? How many times in these draft grades has Ford fawned over an international player who will spend a few years overseas and then come to the NBA to contribute? When it's American player who may take a few years to contribute, all of a sudden it's a bad thing that player will take some time to develop. It doesn't make sense. International players have the benefit of time, but how dare an NBA team draft an American player who needs time to develop! Chad Ford hates it when NBA teams do that.
Sacramento Kings
Round 1: No pick
Round 2: No pick
They traded their only second-round pick for Darius Songailia. It was probably worth it. Sogailia had a great year on one of the best teams in Europe and should be able to step in and help the Kings next year.
Grade: B
While Songailia wasn't terrible in the NBA, it's hilarious that Ford is so obsessed with overseas players the fact that Songailia played well in one year overseas then Ford knows he's immediately ready for the NBA.
Seattle SuperSonics
Round 1: Nick Collison, F, Kansas (No. 12)
Round 1: Luke Ridnour, G, Oregon (No. 14)
Round 2: Paccelis Morlende, G, France
While both of their choices were solid, I think they could've done better. I would've grabbed Cook over Collison at power forward and taken Gaines over Ridnour at the point.
Collison still plays for the Sonics/Thunder, while Brian Cook isn't in the league anymore. Ridnour versus Reece Gaines was another win for the Sonics. This wasn't a great draft, but Chad Ford's suggestions for who the Sonics should have taken are not good at all.
Maybe Ridnour will be the next Steve Nash and Collison will be the next Austin Croshere.
WELCOME TO 2003 EVERYONE! Austin Croshere is a thing that other white power forwards get compared to.
Toronto Raptors
Round 1: Chris Bosh, F, Georgia Tech (No. 4)
Round 2: Matt Bonner, F, Florida (No. 45)
Round 2: Remon Van de Hare, C, Spain (No. 52)
Bosh has the chance to be a special player. It seems like the Raptors would've been better off sending him to Seattle or somewhere else for more veteran players, however.
Bosh had a chance to be a great player. Naturally, the Raptors should have immediately traded him in order to make sure they never got a chance to take advantage of having that great, young player like Chris Bosh. Brilliant idea.
The selection of Van de Hare, a true Euro stiff in the second round, hurt their grade.
(Bengoodfella gasps for breath at the realization that Chad Ford bashed a player who comes from overseas...what about giving him one or two years to develop and then he'll dominate in the NBA? WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT CHAD?)
Grade: B+
Utah Jazz
Round 1: Aleksandar Pavlovic, G, Serbia-Montenegro (No. 19)
Round 2: Maurice Williams, G, Alabama (No. 47)
Pavlovic gives them the shoot-the-lights out scorer they've coveted for years. Alabama's Mo Williams was a steal in round two. Both players could end up contributing in Utah next season.
Of course, Pavlovic may not be able to play a lick of defense, but who cares? He's there for his shooting ability. It's not like a player at #19 should be judged as if he were an all-around player like a player who was drafted at #51 would be judged.
Grade: A-
Washington Wizards
Round 1: Jarvis Hayes, G, Georgia (No. 10)
Round 2: Steve Blake, G, Maryland (No. 38)
Hayes is a good shooter, but in extending Jerry Stackhouse's contract, where does he fit? Stackhouse, Larry Hughes and Juan Dixon all play the same position. As for Steve Blake? So, let's see, Blake, Dixon ... How long before Chris Wilcox and Lonny Baxter end up in a Wizards uniform?
That's ridiculous. How long before Chris W---okay fine...Lonny Baxter played for the Wizards during the 2003-2004 season. That team did win 25 games by the way, which in college would have been a pretty good season. Unfortunately, in the NBA that was out of 82 games played.
Grade: C
Chad Ford seemed to hate this draft and yet it got a "C" grade. Just typical for Chad Ford's 2003 NBA Draft grades. As I always ask, if the grades aren't going to reflect poorly on any of the teams then what is the point of handing out grades? Every team can't have a wonderful to only slightly below average draft.
After 58 picks and several trades Thursday night, ESPN Insider Chad Ford handed out his draft-night grades:
For an organization that loves to embrace debate, the draft experts with ESPN certainly stay pretty vanilla with their draft grades. Not that I'm complaining that Chad Ford doesn't embrace debate, but no team did well below average in the draft? Ford even gives "incomplete" grades instead of handing out a "D" or "F." Thankfully no one got their feelings hurt.
Atlanta Hawks
Round 1: Boris Diaw, SG, France (No. 21) Round 2: Travis Hansen, G, BYU (No. 37)
Boris Diaw was a shooting guard coming out of France. Interesting.
Grade: A-
Hansen only played two years in the NBA, though Diaw was traded for Joe Johnson, which means drafting Boris Diaw is how the Hawks went about overpaying Joe Johnson. That's a lot of information, but this isn't an "A-" draft.
Boston Celtics
Round 1: Marcus Banks, G, UNLV (No. 13) Round 1: Kendrick Perkins, C, Ozen HS (No. 27) Round 2: Brandon Hunter, F, Ohio (No. 56)
I promised that I'd give the Celtics an "F" if they took Banks and Perkins at No. 16 and No. 20. They traded down for Perkins and got him in a more reasonable range, so I upped the grade a bit.
For upped the grade "a bit" from an "F" to a "C." A fucking "C" is upping the grade "a bit." For those who haven't ever attended any type of school above elementary school (that would be no one), if a teacher/professor ups your grade "a bit" from an "F" then you probably aren't expecting for your failing work to all of a sudden become average work. But hey, Chad Ford was so impressed the Celtics got Kendrick Perkins seven picks later than he expected it moved them up two letter grades. Not that Ford makes things up as he goes along of course.
I like Banks' toughness and his ability to get to the basket, but I'm not sure he's that big an upgrade over J.R. Bremer.
I'm going to leave this here with a comment. This is like saying, "I like the taste of cat shit on a sandwich, but I'm not sure it tastes better than horseshit on a bagel." Either option sucks.
In the end, I wonder if the Celtics will get any better this year because of the draft.
Grade: C
One would think if Ford wasn't sure a team got better in the draft that he isn't grading an average draft. One would think absolutely wrong. Apparently a draft where a team doesn't get better is an average draft. Actually, it probably is an average draft from a macro level in that teams on average probably don't get a ton better based on their draft, but that's not how grades for the draft are supposed to work. It's not a "C" draft if the best you can do with two first round picks is Kendrick Perkins.
Chicago Bulls
Round 1: Kirk Hinrich, G, Kansas (No. 7)
Round 2: Mario Austin, F, Mississippi St. (No. 36)
Round 2: Tommy Smith, F, Arizona St. (No. 53)
The Kirk Hinrich pick is a bit of a head-scratcher. I love Hinrich, but I'm not sure how he fits with Jamal Crawford. They needed a bigger two guard who could score and defend. They passed on Mickael Pietrus, a player who could've given them that. Still, Hinrich's versatile enough to play the point and the two.
Ah yes, the days when Jamal Crawford and Kirk Hinrich had to fit in together.
I like Austin in the second round, though I wonder if he'll ever see the light of day behind Tyson Chandler and Eddy Curry.
Well, it was hard to see anything behind Eddy Curry. You know, because he was so fat. Being behind him was never recommended.
Neither second round pick made the team and Ford gave this draft a "B-." This is sort of a high grade for a team whose first round pick he didn't particularly like.
Cleveland Cavaliers
Round 1: LeBron James, G, St. Vincent-St. Mary HS (No. 1)
Round 2: Jason Kapono, F, UCLA (No. 31)
They get an "A" for LeBron, but I thought they really passed up on a chance to get better in the post. I think Jerome Beasley was a real sleeper here and would've been a nice complement to Carlos Boozer.
Not that Jason Kapono was the greatest player ever, but the only impact Jerome Beasley made in the NBA was being mentioned several times in the draft grades that Chad Ford gave out.
Grade: A-
You draft a Hall of Famer (even if by default), then you get an "A" in my book. What's annoying to me is how Ford criticizes the pick of Kapono. To find a guy in the second round who has one elite skill, that's a win in my opinion.
Dallas Mavericks
Round 1: Josh Howard, F, Wake Forest (No. 29)
They got a steal with Josh Howard late in the first. He's the type of all-purpose guy who's thrived in Dallas the past few years.
Credit where credit is due here. Howard was really good for a while. But.................Ford just couldn't quite put aside his love for international players all the way.
I'm a little surprised they left more physical post players such as Mario Austin, Zaur Pachulia and Malick Badiane on the board,
Chad Ford is like, "Sure, the Mavericks made a really selection, but..............you know there are so many international players who we know NOTHING ABOUT and isn't it more fun to draft those guys and pretend they will develop over time, as opposed to drafting a guy the team thinks will help the team win games now?
Grade: B
Detroit Pistons
Round 1: Darko Milicic, F, Serbia-Montenegro (No. 2)
Round 1: Carlos Delfino, G, Italy (No. 25)
Round 2: Andres Gliniadakis, C, Greece (No. 58)
This is a dream draft for Chad Ford. The Pistons had three picks and took zero American players. I don't have to tell you this draft got a "A+" do I? It did. If there were a grade higher than an "A+" then that is the grade Chad Ford would have given the Pistons draft in 2003.
How many teams with the best record in their conference end up with the best big man in the draft and a draft-night steal in Carlos Delfino? By now, you know about Darko, but Delfino will also be important down the road.
Carlos Delfino wasn't a bad player, that is true. But back to Darko...remember how much Chad Ford loved Darko Milicic? It bordered on obsession. What's funny is Ford didn't get his reputation for over-loving foreign-born players just from Darko, he loved nearly every international player because so much wasn't known about them. How much fun is that? If Chad Ford played "Let's Make a Deal" then he would always choose the prize behind the closed door because he has NO IDEA what's behind that door. Not knowing what is behind the door is so much better than the prize he currently has.
Gliniadakis was a nice pickup at the end of the draft. He's a 7-footer who can actually play. The Pistons will leave him in Greece for a few years and bring him over when he's ready.
Ford writes something like, "Leave him overseas until he's ready" in some variation many times in these draft grades. It's like he thinks these international players are chicken tenders you just put in the oven to cook and then they come out ready to be NBA All-Stars. Gliniadakis did come over when he was ready and then immediately got sent back to whence he came. He's still playing in Romania by the way.
Grade: A+
Houston Rockets
Round 1: No pick
Round 2: Malick Badiane, F, Germany (No. 44)
The Rockets made the most of their only pick. The team knows a thing or two about African players and they believe Badiane could be a force in the paint someday.
Chad Ford doesn't even need to know if an international player actually knows what a basketball looks like. Just look at that player and think about how great he could be DOWN THE ROAD SOMEDAY. This draft got a "B+" grade and I'm guessing Ford was tempted to give it an "A++++". I'm not sure Badiane has gotten closer to America than playing in the D-league for one year. But hey, it's a "B+" draft!
Indiana Pacers
Round 1: No pick
Round 2: James Jones, F, Miami (No. 49)
Jones is a nice second rounder. He has size, athleticism and a sweet stroke. But do the Pacers need another small forward?
Grade: B
See? Draft an American player and that team gets knocked from a "B+" to a "B" grade. If his name were Jamemarko Jonesinfino then there's a chance this is an "A" draft. The Pacers made the mistake of drafting a player with a unique skill he can use the NBA. They could have used this pick on a player that no one knew anything about, but who would marinate overseas and then come over to America and totally dominate.
Los Angeles Clippers
Round 1: Chris Kaman, C, Central Michigan (No. 6)
Round 2: Sofoklis Schortsanitis, F, Greece (No. 34)
The Kaman pick makes sense at one level. They know they're going to lose Michael Olowokandi and they're pretty sure that free agents won't be flocking to sign with them. But is Kaman a good fit? He doesn't want to play there and he doesn't fit their style of play.
No worries. The Clippers drafted an international player in the second round. Guess what? Chad Ford LOVES this player I haven't ever heard of and who never actually played in the NBA.
Their second-round pick was a steal at No. 34. Will Schortsanitis replace Elton Brand if he bolts this summer? More likely, he'll head back to Greece for another year or two before trying to bruise and pummel the NBA.
Yes, will Schortsanitis come over and immediately start playing at a high level in the NBA. Logically, he could do this since he was 18 years old at the time and had never played in the NBA before. How could he not come to the NBA and immediately take Elton Brand's place?
The absurdity of Chad Ford's love for international players can not be understated.
Grade: B
Memphis Grizzlies
Round 1: Troy Bell, G, Boston College (No. 16)
Round 1: Dahntay Jones, G, Duke (No. 20)
I can't fault the Grizzlies for liking Troy Bell and Dahntay Jones. They're both proven players and great athletes who can contribute immediately. However, they gave up two first-round picks to draft, essentially, two second-round picks. I don't agree with that. I think Bell will be a nice addition if he can crack the point guard rotation. If he can't, what was the point?
Grade: C-
The Grizzlies reached for two players in the first round and it only got them knocked down to a "C-." What would it take to get a "D" from Chad Ford? Drafting three American players in the first round who were projected to be undrafted? What would it take to get an "F"? Spending three first round picks on three guys who never actually played basketball at any level? Even then, if one of those guys was an international player then that team's draft would probably get a "D-."
Miami Heat
Round 1: Dwyane Wade, G, Marquette (No. 5)
Round 2: Jerome Beasley, C, North Dakota (No. 33)
It's tough to criticize Pat Riley for passing on Lampe when 24 other teams did the same thing.
It's also tough to criticize Riley because Lampe sucked terribly bad and fell in the draft for a very good reason.
Grade: A-
Any draft where a Hall of Famer is selected is an automatic "A" for me. This is a rare instance where Chad Ford gives a team too low of a grade.
Milwaukee Bucks
Round 1: T.J. Ford, G, Texas (No. 8)
Round 2: Szymon Szewczyk, F, Germany (No. 35)
If Gary Payton and Sam Cassell don't come back, it could be a good pick. But with the franchise for sale, will the 6-foot point guard turn this team around? I'm just not sold.
I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE CHAD! The franchise was for sale and you aren't sold on T.J. Ford turning the team around. What if his name was Teejay Fjoryd and he was a skinny guy from Iceland? Would you have liked him more if that were the case?
Szymon Szewczyk is a nice player to get for future use. He'll head back to Germany, but in another year or two he could come back and be a force.
What is it with Chad Ford saying all these guys need "a year or two" overseas and then can come over and dominate? It's never "3-4 years" or "hey, he can come over now and play well," but Ford always gives the international player 1-2 years overseas and then the absolute domination begins.
Grade: C+
Minnesota Timberwolves
Round 1: Ndudi Ebi, F, Westbury Christian HS (No. 26)
Round 2: Rick Rickert, C, Minnesota (No. 55)
Remember the time when the Timberwolves would draft in the mid-20's and not just because they had traded for a pick in that area of the draft?
The Wolves passed on some talent that could help them right now (Josh Howard, Mario Austin) to take a kid that's at least three years away. Ndudi Ebi has the upside to be worth the risk down the road. But for a team like the Wolves -- who need to make that next step in the postseason -- Ebi gives zero relief. Ditto for Rick Rickert, who already gets the official label of draft bust.
Grade: Incomplete
Ford can't even give a failing grade. He gives an "incomplete" grade. Just give a "D" or an "F." Why the fuck would he give an "incomplete" grade for a draft that is complete?
New Jersey Nets
Round 1: Zoran Planinic, G, Croatia (No. 22)
The great thing about Planinic is his versatility -- taking Planinic is like drafting three guys. He has the experience and the basketball skill to make an impact in year one.
Drafting Planinic is like drafting three players. Basically, the Nets had three first round draft picks during the 2003 NBA Draft. What a nice luxury to be able to spend three picks on just one player. I bet Planinic was a real stud in the NBA. (looks up Planinic's numbers in the NBA)
Oh, he never averaged more than 5 points a game and averaged more personal fouls per game than rebounds, assists, or steals. God, how terrible would Planinic have been if drafting him had not been like drafting three guys? More importantly, what kind of versatility did Planinic display? He was good at missing shots (40.5% career FG), good at committing fouls (1.6 fouls per game in 10.7 minutes per game), and wasn't even a good foul shooter (67.7% FT).
Definitely not an "A-" draft from the Nets.
Grade: A-
New York Knicks
Round 1: Mike Sweetney, F, Georgetown (No. 9)
Round 2: Maciej Lampe, F, Poland (No. 30)
Round 2: Slavko Vranes, F, Serbia-Montenegro (No. 39)
But landing the other guy you thought about taking at No. 9, Maciej Lampe, was a huge draft steal. I've seen Lampe play enough to know that his slide wasn't warranted. Lots of teams dropped the ball on him. If he can work out his contract issues with Real Madrid, he'll make Knicks fans happy.
Knicks fans were happy when Lampe didn't play for the team anymore. The same can be said for Sweetney as well. I like how Chad Ford is so confident that Maciej Lampe was going to be a great player. Chad Ford KNEW that Lampe's slide wasn't warranted. So much confidence from a guy who couldn't give a "D" or "F" grade in these draft grades.
Grade: A-
Now, THIS is an "F" draft if there ever is one.
New Orleans Hornets
Round 1: David West, F, Xavier (No. 18)
Round 2: James Lang, C, Central Park Christian HS (No. 48)
David West is a solid pick. He'll contribute a little in year one, get some rebounds and block some shots. He's a poor man's P.J. Brown. They didn't shoot for the moon on this pick, nor did they stick out their necks.
David West was better than a poor man's P.J. Brown. I like how Ford graded this draft. Good effort, good job. Ah, who the fuck knows how to grade it? Here's a "C+" grade.
Orlando Magic
Round 1: Reece Gaines, G, Louisville (No. 15)
Round 2: Zaur Pachulia, F, Turkey (No. 42)
Round 2: Keith Bogans, G, Kentucky (No. 43)
This is the best draft the Magic have had in years. Gaines was the guy they wanted at No. 15 and he's a perfect fit in Doc Rivers' system. Landing Zaur Pachulia in round two was another big coup.
Grade: A
Bogans has had a pretty good career. Reece Gaines was not a fit for Doc Rivers' system. Maybe Chad Ford thought Gaines was from overseas. Even if Zaza and Bogans had decent careers this is not the best draft the Magic had in years (and if so, that's not saying much) and it is not an "A" draft.
Philadelphia 76ers
Round 2: Willie Green, G, Detroit (No. 41)
Round 2: Kyle Korver, F, Creighton (No. 51)
Kyle Korver may be one of the better shooters in the draft, but he can't create his own shoot and can't play a lick of defense.
It's the middle of the second round. To find one of the better shooters in the draft in the second round, in other words finding a guy with an elite skill, is not a bad thing. What else does Ford expect to be available in the middle of the 2nd round?
Grade: C-
We all know soft, white guys are deemed as having a high ceiling if they come from Poland. Unfortunately, Korver came from Creighton, so he has NO projectability and Chad Ford is disgusted at his existence in this draft. Why couldn't Korver just become an accountant like any good self-respecting white guy from America who played college basketball and could shoot the ball well would do?
Portland Trail Blazers
Round 1: Travis Outlaw, F, Starkville HS (No. 23)
Round 2: Nedzad Sinanovic, C, Bosnia-Herzegovina (No. 54)
Travis Outlaw may be a lottery pick after a couple of years in school, but right now he's a second-rounder. He can't contribute and won't for years. Meanwhile, the Blazers passed on several guys (Lampe, Barbosa, Pachulia, Cook) with just as much upside.
Grade: C-
The Trailblazers didn't have a great draft, but since when does Chad Ford have a problem with a player taking a few years to contribute? How many times in these draft grades has Ford fawned over an international player who will spend a few years overseas and then come to the NBA to contribute? When it's American player who may take a few years to contribute, all of a sudden it's a bad thing that player will take some time to develop. It doesn't make sense. International players have the benefit of time, but how dare an NBA team draft an American player who needs time to develop! Chad Ford hates it when NBA teams do that.
Sacramento Kings
Round 1: No pick
Round 2: No pick
They traded their only second-round pick for Darius Songailia. It was probably worth it. Sogailia had a great year on one of the best teams in Europe and should be able to step in and help the Kings next year.
Grade: B
While Songailia wasn't terrible in the NBA, it's hilarious that Ford is so obsessed with overseas players the fact that Songailia played well in one year overseas then Ford knows he's immediately ready for the NBA.
Seattle SuperSonics
Round 1: Nick Collison, F, Kansas (No. 12)
Round 1: Luke Ridnour, G, Oregon (No. 14)
Round 2: Paccelis Morlende, G, France
While both of their choices were solid, I think they could've done better. I would've grabbed Cook over Collison at power forward and taken Gaines over Ridnour at the point.
Collison still plays for the Sonics/Thunder, while Brian Cook isn't in the league anymore. Ridnour versus Reece Gaines was another win for the Sonics. This wasn't a great draft, but Chad Ford's suggestions for who the Sonics should have taken are not good at all.
Maybe Ridnour will be the next Steve Nash and Collison will be the next Austin Croshere.
WELCOME TO 2003 EVERYONE! Austin Croshere is a thing that other white power forwards get compared to.
Toronto Raptors
Round 1: Chris Bosh, F, Georgia Tech (No. 4)
Round 2: Matt Bonner, F, Florida (No. 45)
Round 2: Remon Van de Hare, C, Spain (No. 52)
Bosh has the chance to be a special player. It seems like the Raptors would've been better off sending him to Seattle or somewhere else for more veteran players, however.
Bosh had a chance to be a great player. Naturally, the Raptors should have immediately traded him in order to make sure they never got a chance to take advantage of having that great, young player like Chris Bosh. Brilliant idea.
The selection of Van de Hare, a true Euro stiff in the second round, hurt their grade.
(Bengoodfella gasps for breath at the realization that Chad Ford bashed a player who comes from overseas...what about giving him one or two years to develop and then he'll dominate in the NBA? WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT CHAD?)
Grade: B+
Utah Jazz
Round 1: Aleksandar Pavlovic, G, Serbia-Montenegro (No. 19)
Round 2: Maurice Williams, G, Alabama (No. 47)
Pavlovic gives them the shoot-the-lights out scorer they've coveted for years. Alabama's Mo Williams was a steal in round two. Both players could end up contributing in Utah next season.
Of course, Pavlovic may not be able to play a lick of defense, but who cares? He's there for his shooting ability. It's not like a player at #19 should be judged as if he were an all-around player like a player who was drafted at #51 would be judged.
Grade: A-
Washington Wizards
Round 1: Jarvis Hayes, G, Georgia (No. 10)
Round 2: Steve Blake, G, Maryland (No. 38)
Hayes is a good shooter, but in extending Jerry Stackhouse's contract, where does he fit? Stackhouse, Larry Hughes and Juan Dixon all play the same position. As for Steve Blake? So, let's see, Blake, Dixon ... How long before Chris Wilcox and Lonny Baxter end up in a Wizards uniform?
That's ridiculous. How long before Chris W---okay fine...Lonny Baxter played for the Wizards during the 2003-2004 season. That team did win 25 games by the way, which in college would have been a pretty good season. Unfortunately, in the NBA that was out of 82 games played.
Grade: C
Chad Ford seemed to hate this draft and yet it got a "C" grade. Just typical for Chad Ford's 2003 NBA Draft grades. As I always ask, if the grades aren't going to reflect poorly on any of the teams then what is the point of handing out grades? Every team can't have a wonderful to only slightly below average draft.
Wednesday, May 27, 2015
4 comments How To Fix the NBA Lottery By Making it More Non-Sensical and Absurd
Has anyone been worried about the NBA lottery and how it rewards teams for tanking? No worries from here on out! This problem has been figured out by "Slate." There is a brilliant idea posted on the site on how to fix the NBA lottery and make everything more fair. The best part is this idea takes the lottery process and turns it into a circus atmosphere, where the intention goes away from choosing lottery spots for each team and becomes more of an exercise in creating manufactured drama. Why does everything have to be dramatic and overly-difficult?
On another note, does anyone but sportswriters care that the NBA lottery is fixed to where teams have some incentive to tank? Like, is this a big deal that the normal sports fan really cares about or is the complaining about tanking simply something the media cares about more than a sports fan does? Me personally, I could care less if the 76ers tank and get a high draft pick. It doesn't bother me. The idea some teams are so terrible they get rewarded for being bad just doesn't bother me that much (as long as I'm not a fan of that team). I could be in the minority, but I feel like others in the media are more concerned about this than I am.
This is the year that NBA tanking went off the rails.
Every year over the past few years, this has been written somewhere.
The Philadelphia 76ers, for starters, exemplified a whole new level of basketball seppuku with a team so willfully awful that the New York Times Magazine felt compelled to publish a feature story about their willful awfulness.
The 76ers were so terrible that people in the media noticed how terrible they were.
By descending into “tank mode,” the Sixers hoped to lose enough games that they’d receive one of the valuable first picks in the upcoming NBA draft.
Oh, so THAT is how tanking works? Thanks for clearing that one up. By the way, this is the third straight season the 76ers have essentially done this. So if they were "off the rails" this year then it isn't "the year" tanking went "off the rails." There are a lot of quotes in that sentence. More quotes than good points made in this column in fact.
The New York Knicks, Los Angeles Lakers, and other teams were accused of plunging into the tank for large swaths of this season. Which is sad.
Let's be slightly fair, the Lakers stumbled on to tanking. They managed to lose their first round pick to injury, their best player to injury, and their old point guard tried to come back from injury and had to retire instead. The intention wasn't to tank, but at some point they have to throw up their hands and realize it ain't their year.
Tanking makes for ugly basketball and it throws off competitive balance.
(Bengoodfella shrugs his shoulders) As long as a large percentage of the NBA isn't tanking then I really don't feel too concerned about this problem.
Perhaps worst of all: Fans of tanking teams find themselves not only watching putrid hoops but also perversely rooting against their hometown squads
And again, this is very weird and not good for the fans of these teams. Would fixing the lottery so these teams don't get good players really help the situation? The assumption is management would stop tanking, but would it really stop this strategy? I'm not entirely sure. Lest it be forgotten that the current lottery system was put in place to prevent tanking. From the Bondy column:
The lottery was put into place by David Stern after the spring of 1984 turned into an uncomfortable tank-fest. The way it worked, teams with the very worst record in each conference flipped a coin for the first pick and then other selections were made in inverse order of won-loss records. Not surprisingly, the franchises that still owned their first-round picks hemorrhaged defeats. The Rockets dropped 14 of their last 17 games, nine of their last 10, and their final five. They were rewarded with Olajuwon as the No. 1 pick. The Bulls lost 14 of their last 15 to land Jordan at No. 3.
To quell this perception, Stern instituted the draft lottery, which gave teams far less reason to throw away games.
Sounds a lot like the strategy teams are using 30 years later. The draft lottery was supposed to stop teams from tanking. It didn't. So changes are being suggested again. And again, teams will tank anyway.
You know something has gone awry when Knicks coach Derek Fisher feels pressure to apologize to fans for winning.
In that article, Fisher seemed to say he doesn't feel pressure to apologize to fans for winning. He's not going to apologize for it, so therefore I would say he doesn't feel the pressure. OR it could be we are arguing over semantics in regard to a lottery change that won't ever change the fact NBA teams are going to tank.
The best tanking solution would be relegation, as happens in European soccer leagues. Each year, the bottom three teams in the continent’s top divisions are kicked out of the league and relegated to a lower one. Regrettably, with NBA teams currently selling for $2 billion apiece, it's unlikely we'll get owners to agree that a few of them should be banished to the D-League each year to compete against the Sioux Falls Skyforce.
Clearly the author is a fan of Bill Simmons since Bill has floated this idea jokingly (not jokingly?) in columns before. And yes, no NBA team will be relegated. I don't even know how that would work with the NBA Draft and I don't really care either.
A more likely solution would be for the NBA to flatten out the lottery odds. Right now the worst team has a 25 percent chance at the top pick while the 14th-worst team has a 0.5 percent chance. We could switch to a true lottery, in which all 14 non-playoff teams would get an equal 7.14 percent chance at the top pick.
So basically the same lottery system the NBA used to use, then got rid of in order to discourage teams from tanking? Get rid of the currently lottery system in order to go back to the old lottery system which was changed because it encouraged teams to tank? Gotta have a sense of history. The odds are not as great now that a team would land the #1 pick (it was around 14% thirty years ago), but the system was no longer used for a reason.
Another draft scheme that’s gotten lots of attention is “the wheel”—a system in which the draft order would be set far in advance so that a team’s draft position would have zero to do with its on-court performance.
Sounds great, but I have a feeling teams would still find a way to tank. I have no idea how, but NBA teams have tanked at times for decades and it is almost a reflex for some teams who are looking to rebuild.
This would eliminate any reason to tank, but it would also do nothing to help bad teams get better. The worst team in the league might end up picking dead last in the draft.
And therein lies the whole problem with the media's teeth-gnashing over fixing the lottery. How can a lottery be set up for the purpose to help teams that aren't very good so they do become very good, while also not giving teams incentive to tank? The NBA can't help bad teams, while also not giving teams incentive to be bad. That is, unless some convoluted lottery set up over a several year span where to occur. Something like a team can't get a Top 5 pick for a certain amount of years if they have had one in the previous year. But again, this would work at cross purposes to help a team that's trying to get better. The Thunder never would have had the chance to draft James Harden and Russell Westbrook if this rule were in effect over the last decade.
As horrible as the status quo is, some version of reverse-order drafting—and the increased parity it helps create—is still a worthy goal. So the problem seems intractable.
It is. It's very hard to help bad teams while not incentivizing these teams to be bad.
But fear not, NBA fans! A superior answer exists, and a friend of mine has invented it. It’s fair, it’s elegant, and it’s fun. My friend calls it the “You’re the Worst!” draft.
Maybe not ironically, this draft idea is the worst draft idea. It's convoluted and turns the lottery into a drama that becomes more game show than simple lottery to determine draft position.
How would it work? On the day before the regular season began, the NBA would hold a “You’re the Worst!” draft. Selection order for the YTW draft would be determined like any standard reverse-order draft—the team that had the worst win-loss record in the previous season would pick first, the team that had the best record would pick last. But the teams wouldn’t be drafting players.
(Cue overdramatic music)
They’d be choosing the rights to another team’s position in the next NBA draft.
I see that you, as a reader, maybe confused by one part of this. You may be asking, "But, would each team point at each other and say 'you're the worst' during this process?" Fear not, that is something that would happen. Just wait for the full plan to be revealed.
So, for example, the Minnesota Timberwolves, who finished this season with the worst win-loss record, would have the first YTW pick in the fall when the 2015–16 season started. One day before opening day, all of the league’s general managers would gather together in a room. The T-Wolves would look around that room and decide which team they thought would finish worst in 2015–16.
Again, this is over complicating the entire lottery process needlessly. There is no reason to do this, other than to provide needless drama and over-complicate the process. It's a fun idea, but not something that should really happen.
Minnesota general manager Milt Newton might predict that the Knicks would be the worst team next season. In which case he would shout, “You’re the worst!” while pointing at Knicks President Phil Jackson, stealing the Knicks’ position in the 2016 NBA draft.
I wonder if it doesn't count as saying a team is the worst if a team's GM chooses to point but not shout or simply decides to shout without pointing? I would say this is all a joke, but I really don't think it is based on the columnist really defending why this is a good way to determine a team's lottery position.
If the Knicks indeed finished worst next year, the T-wolves would then receive the top pick in the 2016 draft. If the Knicks finished with the third-worst record, the T-Wolves would receive the No. 3 pick.
I'll play this game. I feel like there is some issue with this method if one team owns another team's first round pick in certain situations (if it falls out of the Top 7, etc) that could affect how this idea would work. I'm trying to think of specific examples, but can't. Perhaps this isn't an issue, but it feels to me like this lottery set up could impact draft picks that are lottery protected.
In this scenario, say the Knicks plan on tanking during the 15-16 year to get a better pick and everyone knows this. The Timberwolves know they will end up getting a high pick in the draft no matter what because they have chosen the Knicks as the team with the worst record, so it won't affect whether THEY tank or not. They are free to tank (again) because they know they will get the first (or really close to first) team choice again the next year. Alternatively in this scenario, say the Timberwolves plan on trying to win as many games as possible and they are chosen to have the sixth worst record in the NBA. If the Timberwolves know the Knicks are tanking during the 15-16 season and they are guaranteed to have a high lottery pick, then what's the point in trying to win games? They have another chance to pick early during the 16-17 lottery! Why should the T-Wolves care if another team gets a higher pick through the T-Wolves deciding to tank as long as the Knicks keep losing? At that point, the T-Wolves can continue to tank, but just as long as they know the Knicks are worse than them.
(Hopefully that made sense. Basically, the T-Wolves still have no incentive to be a good team in this lottery system.)
After the Wolves picked, Jackson and the Knicks, with their second-worst record this past season, would look around the room, predict which remaining team might perform most horribly in 2015–16, and select that team’s 2016 draft pick. Preferably while pointing and shouting, “You’re the next worst!”
Yes, preferably there would be pointing and shouting.
Let’s look at how things would have panned out if we’d held a YTW draft for the 2014–15 season. Since the Bucks accumulated the worst win-loss record last year, and the 76ers appeared to be clearly the worst team entering this season, the Bucks would've selected the 76ers first in the YTW draft. It turned out that the 76ers earned the third-worst record, so the Bucks would be getting the third pick in this June’s NBA draft.
And the Bucks made the playoffs, so naturally they should be rewarded for making the playoffs by receiving a higher draft pick. Wait, that's not the purpose of the lottery is it?
It’s a pretty good result.
It is a pretty good result based upon your guess on which teams other teams would choose as being the worst. It's always fun when a writer wants to prove his point as correct and then uses his assumptions as the "factual basis" that shows the underlying points as correct.
And it's not exactly pretty good. Two of these teams made the playoffs and out of the 10 worst teams in the NBA this past year only 3 will get a Top 5 pick and of the 5 worst teams in the NBA, only 1 of those teams gets a Top 5 pick. So if the purpose was to stop tanking, it would work, but if the purpose was to help teams like the Knicks, Lakers, T-Wolves, and Magic get better (and really, I would only count one of those teams as truly tanking) then this result doesn't work well at all.
Although the Bucks, last year’s worst team, wouldn't end up with the first pick in this year’s NBA draft—something that often doesn't happen anyway, due to the lottery—the new positions still would be heavily weighted toward the bottom feeders.
As long as you ignore that of the bottom 5 teams in the NBA, only 1 of them gets a Top 5 pick. As I said, it works at cross-purposes to decrease tanking while trying not to award the worst teams with the chance to draft the best players. It's very hard to do both.
Though the Timberwolves wouldn't receive the first pick in the upcoming player draft, despite finishing with the worst record, they would own the YTW No. 1 this fall, which would very likely pay off in 2016.
I like how the author tries to sell this. He sells it as "the T-Wolves didn't get the first pick in the draft, so preventing tanking works, but next year they will get the first chance to pick which NBA team will be the worst, so tanking does pay off."
Funny how that works isn't? Tanking isn't necessarily discouraged any more than a team knows the pay off for tanking will come, but maybe not immediately. The author can't have it both ways. He can't have this system as a way to prevent tanking, then point out how a team that tanks will be set up to have an early pick two drafts from now.
The obvious benefit of this system is that no team would have an incentive to tank throughout the season (barring collusion). Just think about how this season could have been different.
But a team would still have incentive to tank, because as the author just said, the Timberwolves wouldn't receive the first pick in the draft by having the worst record but they would still have the chance to pick the worst team in the NBA the next year. In fact, the author says having the worst record during the 14-15 season would "pay off" in 15-16. So there's the incentive.
If the Knicks didn’t derive a direct benefit from being so terrible, would they have shut down Carmelo? Would the 76ers dare to build a team so nakedly atrocious?
Yes, because teams that tank aren't thinking about the short-term, but only in the long-term. In the long-term, tanking will "pay off" through having the first chance to choose the worst team in the NBA for the upcoming season. There is the incentive to tank.
Another benefit to the “You’re the Worst” system: It would be exciting!
No, this is the only benefit. Something being exciting doesn't mean that it's also a good idea. I don't think this system would prevent tanking, especially since most teams that are tanking aren't looking at the short-term view. Having to wait another year for tanking to pay off wouldn't be a big deal to an NBA team.
With YTW, we’d replace the lottery with even better drama. Wouldn’t you tune in to see Newton, or better yet Wolves president and coach Flip Saunders, walk up to the podium on national television, look Phil Jackson straight in the eye, and say, “You’re the worst!”? (OK, it would be more like, “With the first pick in the preseason selection-order draft, the Timberwolves select the Knicks.” But the implied insult would be there.)
I probably would not be more inclined to watch this than I'm inclined to watch the current lottery selection show.
Because NBA fans have long memories, animosity would instantly sprout. Consider: If the Knicks visited Philadelphia right after calling them “the worst,” the Philly crowd might get rowdy
There's nothing like trying to manufacture a rivalry AND manufacture drama.
It stinks to root against your own team, but it’s hella fun to root against other teams. Players would also be eager to prove rival teams’ projections wrong. Ultimately, YTW would enhance—wait for it—competitiveness!
It would not in the same way the current lottery system was supposed to stop tanking and it did not. But it's hella fun to pretend NBA teams aren't going to just tank anyway in an effort to stop something that will happen as long as the intent of the lottery is to get the best players to the worst teams.
To be sure, this system is not perfect.
Noooooooooooooooooo. This system seems pretty perfect to me.
It might take a casual fan a few run-throughs to understand. And it puts a heavy premium on the forecasting skills of NBA front offices. Nerdy spreadsheet jockeys would become even more valuable than they already are.
Does the author really believe the Sixers would not have tanked over the past three seasons in an effort to get a good draft pick if they knew they had to wait another year for the tanking to pay off? This is a real belief the author has? A team like the Knicks or 76ers that are trying to cut salary and gather high draft picks won't be willing to wait another year for the tanking to pay off? These teams know they would get a pretty good pick if they tank, because they would get to choose which NBA team they think will be the worst during the upcoming season, and they know a 3-5 year rebuilding plan takes 3-5 years. So what's waiting another year for tanking to pay off?
But it might be better for Sam Hinkie to put his geek skills to use in the service of predictive analysis—or maybe even figuring out how to help his team win—instead of searching for the most efficient way to lose.
Because he wouldn't use that predictive analysis to find out which teams will be the worst so that once the Sixers continue to tank they can choose another team that's just as terrible as they are, all in the name of getting a higher pick. This system won't stop tanking any more than the change to the system used prior to 1985 stopped tanking.
On another note, does anyone but sportswriters care that the NBA lottery is fixed to where teams have some incentive to tank? Like, is this a big deal that the normal sports fan really cares about or is the complaining about tanking simply something the media cares about more than a sports fan does? Me personally, I could care less if the 76ers tank and get a high draft pick. It doesn't bother me. The idea some teams are so terrible they get rewarded for being bad just doesn't bother me that much (as long as I'm not a fan of that team). I could be in the minority, but I feel like others in the media are more concerned about this than I am.
This is the year that NBA tanking went off the rails.
Every year over the past few years, this has been written somewhere.
The Philadelphia 76ers, for starters, exemplified a whole new level of basketball seppuku with a team so willfully awful that the New York Times Magazine felt compelled to publish a feature story about their willful awfulness.
The 76ers were so terrible that people in the media noticed how terrible they were.
By descending into “tank mode,” the Sixers hoped to lose enough games that they’d receive one of the valuable first picks in the upcoming NBA draft.
Oh, so THAT is how tanking works? Thanks for clearing that one up. By the way, this is the third straight season the 76ers have essentially done this. So if they were "off the rails" this year then it isn't "the year" tanking went "off the rails." There are a lot of quotes in that sentence. More quotes than good points made in this column in fact.
The New York Knicks, Los Angeles Lakers, and other teams were accused of plunging into the tank for large swaths of this season. Which is sad.
Let's be slightly fair, the Lakers stumbled on to tanking. They managed to lose their first round pick to injury, their best player to injury, and their old point guard tried to come back from injury and had to retire instead. The intention wasn't to tank, but at some point they have to throw up their hands and realize it ain't their year.
Tanking makes for ugly basketball and it throws off competitive balance.
(Bengoodfella shrugs his shoulders) As long as a large percentage of the NBA isn't tanking then I really don't feel too concerned about this problem.
Perhaps worst of all: Fans of tanking teams find themselves not only watching putrid hoops but also perversely rooting against their hometown squads
And again, this is very weird and not good for the fans of these teams. Would fixing the lottery so these teams don't get good players really help the situation? The assumption is management would stop tanking, but would it really stop this strategy? I'm not entirely sure. Lest it be forgotten that the current lottery system was put in place to prevent tanking. From the Bondy column:
The lottery was put into place by David Stern after the spring of 1984 turned into an uncomfortable tank-fest. The way it worked, teams with the very worst record in each conference flipped a coin for the first pick and then other selections were made in inverse order of won-loss records. Not surprisingly, the franchises that still owned their first-round picks hemorrhaged defeats. The Rockets dropped 14 of their last 17 games, nine of their last 10, and their final five. They were rewarded with Olajuwon as the No. 1 pick. The Bulls lost 14 of their last 15 to land Jordan at No. 3.
To quell this perception, Stern instituted the draft lottery, which gave teams far less reason to throw away games.
Sounds a lot like the strategy teams are using 30 years later. The draft lottery was supposed to stop teams from tanking. It didn't. So changes are being suggested again. And again, teams will tank anyway.
You know something has gone awry when Knicks coach Derek Fisher feels pressure to apologize to fans for winning.
In that article, Fisher seemed to say he doesn't feel pressure to apologize to fans for winning. He's not going to apologize for it, so therefore I would say he doesn't feel the pressure. OR it could be we are arguing over semantics in regard to a lottery change that won't ever change the fact NBA teams are going to tank.
The best tanking solution would be relegation, as happens in European soccer leagues. Each year, the bottom three teams in the continent’s top divisions are kicked out of the league and relegated to a lower one. Regrettably, with NBA teams currently selling for $2 billion apiece, it's unlikely we'll get owners to agree that a few of them should be banished to the D-League each year to compete against the Sioux Falls Skyforce.
Clearly the author is a fan of Bill Simmons since Bill has floated this idea jokingly (not jokingly?) in columns before. And yes, no NBA team will be relegated. I don't even know how that would work with the NBA Draft and I don't really care either.
A more likely solution would be for the NBA to flatten out the lottery odds. Right now the worst team has a 25 percent chance at the top pick while the 14th-worst team has a 0.5 percent chance. We could switch to a true lottery, in which all 14 non-playoff teams would get an equal 7.14 percent chance at the top pick.
So basically the same lottery system the NBA used to use, then got rid of in order to discourage teams from tanking? Get rid of the currently lottery system in order to go back to the old lottery system which was changed because it encouraged teams to tank? Gotta have a sense of history. The odds are not as great now that a team would land the #1 pick (it was around 14% thirty years ago), but the system was no longer used for a reason.
Another draft scheme that’s gotten lots of attention is “the wheel”—a system in which the draft order would be set far in advance so that a team’s draft position would have zero to do with its on-court performance.
Sounds great, but I have a feeling teams would still find a way to tank. I have no idea how, but NBA teams have tanked at times for decades and it is almost a reflex for some teams who are looking to rebuild.
This would eliminate any reason to tank, but it would also do nothing to help bad teams get better. The worst team in the league might end up picking dead last in the draft.
And therein lies the whole problem with the media's teeth-gnashing over fixing the lottery. How can a lottery be set up for the purpose to help teams that aren't very good so they do become very good, while also not giving teams incentive to tank? The NBA can't help bad teams, while also not giving teams incentive to be bad. That is, unless some convoluted lottery set up over a several year span where to occur. Something like a team can't get a Top 5 pick for a certain amount of years if they have had one in the previous year. But again, this would work at cross purposes to help a team that's trying to get better. The Thunder never would have had the chance to draft James Harden and Russell Westbrook if this rule were in effect over the last decade.
As horrible as the status quo is, some version of reverse-order drafting—and the increased parity it helps create—is still a worthy goal. So the problem seems intractable.
It is. It's very hard to help bad teams while not incentivizing these teams to be bad.
But fear not, NBA fans! A superior answer exists, and a friend of mine has invented it. It’s fair, it’s elegant, and it’s fun. My friend calls it the “You’re the Worst!” draft.
Maybe not ironically, this draft idea is the worst draft idea. It's convoluted and turns the lottery into a drama that becomes more game show than simple lottery to determine draft position.
How would it work? On the day before the regular season began, the NBA would hold a “You’re the Worst!” draft. Selection order for the YTW draft would be determined like any standard reverse-order draft—the team that had the worst win-loss record in the previous season would pick first, the team that had the best record would pick last. But the teams wouldn’t be drafting players.
(Cue overdramatic music)
They’d be choosing the rights to another team’s position in the next NBA draft.
I see that you, as a reader, maybe confused by one part of this. You may be asking, "But, would each team point at each other and say 'you're the worst' during this process?" Fear not, that is something that would happen. Just wait for the full plan to be revealed.
So, for example, the Minnesota Timberwolves, who finished this season with the worst win-loss record, would have the first YTW pick in the fall when the 2015–16 season started. One day before opening day, all of the league’s general managers would gather together in a room. The T-Wolves would look around that room and decide which team they thought would finish worst in 2015–16.
Again, this is over complicating the entire lottery process needlessly. There is no reason to do this, other than to provide needless drama and over-complicate the process. It's a fun idea, but not something that should really happen.
Minnesota general manager Milt Newton might predict that the Knicks would be the worst team next season. In which case he would shout, “You’re the worst!” while pointing at Knicks President Phil Jackson, stealing the Knicks’ position in the 2016 NBA draft.
I wonder if it doesn't count as saying a team is the worst if a team's GM chooses to point but not shout or simply decides to shout without pointing? I would say this is all a joke, but I really don't think it is based on the columnist really defending why this is a good way to determine a team's lottery position.
If the Knicks indeed finished worst next year, the T-wolves would then receive the top pick in the 2016 draft. If the Knicks finished with the third-worst record, the T-Wolves would receive the No. 3 pick.
I'll play this game. I feel like there is some issue with this method if one team owns another team's first round pick in certain situations (if it falls out of the Top 7, etc) that could affect how this idea would work. I'm trying to think of specific examples, but can't. Perhaps this isn't an issue, but it feels to me like this lottery set up could impact draft picks that are lottery protected.
In this scenario, say the Knicks plan on tanking during the 15-16 year to get a better pick and everyone knows this. The Timberwolves know they will end up getting a high pick in the draft no matter what because they have chosen the Knicks as the team with the worst record, so it won't affect whether THEY tank or not. They are free to tank (again) because they know they will get the first (or really close to first) team choice again the next year. Alternatively in this scenario, say the Timberwolves plan on trying to win as many games as possible and they are chosen to have the sixth worst record in the NBA. If the Timberwolves know the Knicks are tanking during the 15-16 season and they are guaranteed to have a high lottery pick, then what's the point in trying to win games? They have another chance to pick early during the 16-17 lottery! Why should the T-Wolves care if another team gets a higher pick through the T-Wolves deciding to tank as long as the Knicks keep losing? At that point, the T-Wolves can continue to tank, but just as long as they know the Knicks are worse than them.
(Hopefully that made sense. Basically, the T-Wolves still have no incentive to be a good team in this lottery system.)
After the Wolves picked, Jackson and the Knicks, with their second-worst record this past season, would look around the room, predict which remaining team might perform most horribly in 2015–16, and select that team’s 2016 draft pick. Preferably while pointing and shouting, “You’re the next worst!”
Yes, preferably there would be pointing and shouting.
Let’s look at how things would have panned out if we’d held a YTW draft for the 2014–15 season. Since the Bucks accumulated the worst win-loss record last year, and the 76ers appeared to be clearly the worst team entering this season, the Bucks would've selected the 76ers first in the YTW draft. It turned out that the 76ers earned the third-worst record, so the Bucks would be getting the third pick in this June’s NBA draft.
And the Bucks made the playoffs, so naturally they should be rewarded for making the playoffs by receiving a higher draft pick. Wait, that's not the purpose of the lottery is it?
Here’s how the 2015 NBA draft might look if there’d been a
YTW draft on Oct. 27, 2014, the day before this season started (we’ll
use SCHOENE projections from the start of the season as a proxy for how general managers might have projected other teams):
- Denver Nuggets (The Nuggets had the 11th-worst record in 2013–14, so they’d pick 11th in the YTW draft; the Timberwolves were projected to be the 11th-worst team this season, so the Nuggets would have stolen their pick. Since the T-Wolves finished with the league’s worst record, the Nuggets would get the first pick in June’s draft.)
- Sacramento Kings (seventh-worst record in 2013–14, steal New York Knicks pick)
- Milwaukee Bucks (worst record in 2013–14, steal 76ers pick)
- Boston Celtics (fifth-worst record in 2013–14, steal Lakers pick)
- Philadelphia 76ers (second-worst record in 2013–14, steal Orlando Magic pick)
It is a pretty good result based upon your guess on which teams other teams would choose as being the worst. It's always fun when a writer wants to prove his point as correct and then uses his assumptions as the "factual basis" that shows the underlying points as correct.
And it's not exactly pretty good. Two of these teams made the playoffs and out of the 10 worst teams in the NBA this past year only 3 will get a Top 5 pick and of the 5 worst teams in the NBA, only 1 of those teams gets a Top 5 pick. So if the purpose was to stop tanking, it would work, but if the purpose was to help teams like the Knicks, Lakers, T-Wolves, and Magic get better (and really, I would only count one of those teams as truly tanking) then this result doesn't work well at all.
Although the Bucks, last year’s worst team, wouldn't end up with the first pick in this year’s NBA draft—something that often doesn't happen anyway, due to the lottery—the new positions still would be heavily weighted toward the bottom feeders.
As long as you ignore that of the bottom 5 teams in the NBA, only 1 of them gets a Top 5 pick. As I said, it works at cross-purposes to decrease tanking while trying not to award the worst teams with the chance to draft the best players. It's very hard to do both.
Though the Timberwolves wouldn't receive the first pick in the upcoming player draft, despite finishing with the worst record, they would own the YTW No. 1 this fall, which would very likely pay off in 2016.
I like how the author tries to sell this. He sells it as "the T-Wolves didn't get the first pick in the draft, so preventing tanking works, but next year they will get the first chance to pick which NBA team will be the worst, so tanking does pay off."
Funny how that works isn't? Tanking isn't necessarily discouraged any more than a team knows the pay off for tanking will come, but maybe not immediately. The author can't have it both ways. He can't have this system as a way to prevent tanking, then point out how a team that tanks will be set up to have an early pick two drafts from now.
The obvious benefit of this system is that no team would have an incentive to tank throughout the season (barring collusion). Just think about how this season could have been different.
But a team would still have incentive to tank, because as the author just said, the Timberwolves wouldn't receive the first pick in the draft by having the worst record but they would still have the chance to pick the worst team in the NBA the next year. In fact, the author says having the worst record during the 14-15 season would "pay off" in 15-16. So there's the incentive.
If the Knicks didn’t derive a direct benefit from being so terrible, would they have shut down Carmelo? Would the 76ers dare to build a team so nakedly atrocious?
Yes, because teams that tank aren't thinking about the short-term, but only in the long-term. In the long-term, tanking will "pay off" through having the first chance to choose the worst team in the NBA for the upcoming season. There is the incentive to tank.
Another benefit to the “You’re the Worst” system: It would be exciting!
No, this is the only benefit. Something being exciting doesn't mean that it's also a good idea. I don't think this system would prevent tanking, especially since most teams that are tanking aren't looking at the short-term view. Having to wait another year for tanking to pay off wouldn't be a big deal to an NBA team.
With YTW, we’d replace the lottery with even better drama. Wouldn’t you tune in to see Newton, or better yet Wolves president and coach Flip Saunders, walk up to the podium on national television, look Phil Jackson straight in the eye, and say, “You’re the worst!”? (OK, it would be more like, “With the first pick in the preseason selection-order draft, the Timberwolves select the Knicks.” But the implied insult would be there.)
I probably would not be more inclined to watch this than I'm inclined to watch the current lottery selection show.
Because NBA fans have long memories, animosity would instantly sprout. Consider: If the Knicks visited Philadelphia right after calling them “the worst,” the Philly crowd might get rowdy
There's nothing like trying to manufacture a rivalry AND manufacture drama.
It stinks to root against your own team, but it’s hella fun to root against other teams. Players would also be eager to prove rival teams’ projections wrong. Ultimately, YTW would enhance—wait for it—competitiveness!
It would not in the same way the current lottery system was supposed to stop tanking and it did not. But it's hella fun to pretend NBA teams aren't going to just tank anyway in an effort to stop something that will happen as long as the intent of the lottery is to get the best players to the worst teams.
To be sure, this system is not perfect.
Noooooooooooooooooo. This system seems pretty perfect to me.
It might take a casual fan a few run-throughs to understand. And it puts a heavy premium on the forecasting skills of NBA front offices. Nerdy spreadsheet jockeys would become even more valuable than they already are.
Does the author really believe the Sixers would not have tanked over the past three seasons in an effort to get a good draft pick if they knew they had to wait another year for the tanking to pay off? This is a real belief the author has? A team like the Knicks or 76ers that are trying to cut salary and gather high draft picks won't be willing to wait another year for the tanking to pay off? These teams know they would get a pretty good pick if they tank, because they would get to choose which NBA team they think will be the worst during the upcoming season, and they know a 3-5 year rebuilding plan takes 3-5 years. So what's waiting another year for tanking to pay off?
But it might be better for Sam Hinkie to put his geek skills to use in the service of predictive analysis—or maybe even figuring out how to help his team win—instead of searching for the most efficient way to lose.
Because he wouldn't use that predictive analysis to find out which teams will be the worst so that once the Sixers continue to tank they can choose another team that's just as terrible as they are, all in the name of getting a higher pick. This system won't stop tanking any more than the change to the system used prior to 1985 stopped tanking.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)