Celticsstrong 2021 Historical Draft - VOTES ARE IN

[nickagneta]

watching old highlights and remembering the game and how physical it used to be, I find it hard to believe that most of the old school guys wouldnt dominate in todays nba with the soft rules.

Also, Put Lebron back in the late 80 and early 90s and he would have quit the game.

Some guys, yes. But those that used extra physical means to be more successful than their basketball abilities would allow them to be, wouldn't be as good. Most of those guys would be collecting flagrant fouls on the regular making them less playable and less effective.

[Darth_Yoda]

watching old highlights and remembering the game and how physical it used to be, I find it hard to believe that most of the old school guys wouldnt dominate in todays nba with the soft rules.

Also, Put Lebron back in the late 80 and early 90s and he would have quit the game.

Some guys, yes. But those that used extra physical means to be more successful than their basketball abilities would allow them to be, wouldn't be as good. Most of those guys would be collecting flagrant fouls on the regular making them less playable and less effective.

Naw, they would tame it down. I was thinking more about the scorers from back in the day. With no handchecking etc, they would have so much of an easier time.

Imagine Dr J Today? OR Gervin? English? Man they would score 35+ ppg.

[Moranis]

watching old highlights and remembering the game and how physical it used to be, I find it hard to believe that most of the old school guys wouldnt dominate in todays nba with the soft rules.

Also, Put Lebron back in the late 80 and early 90s and he would have quit the game.

Some guys, yes. But those that used extra physical means to be more successful than their basketball abilities would allow them to be, wouldn't be as good. Most of those guys would be collecting flagrant fouls on the regular making them less playable and less effective.

Naw, they would tame it down. I was thinking more about the scorers from back in the day. With no handchecking etc, they would have so much of an easier time.

Imagine Dr J Today? OR Gervin? English? Man they would score 35+ ppg.

no they wouldn't because they would have come up today and focused far more on shooting than the skills that made them who they were.  They'd be completely different players.   

[Darth_Yoda]

watching old highlights and remembering the game and how physical it used to be, I find it hard to believe that most of the old school guys wouldnt dominate in todays nba with the soft rules.

Also, Put Lebron back in the late 80 and early 90s and he would have quit the game.

Some guys, yes. But those that used extra physical means to be more successful than their basketball abilities would allow them to be, wouldn't be as good. Most of those guys would be collecting flagrant fouls on the regular making them less playable and less effective.

Naw, they would tame it down. I was thinking more about the scorers from back in the day. With no handchecking etc, they would have so much of an easier time.

Imagine Dr J Today? OR Gervin? English? Man they would score 35+ ppg.

no they wouldn't because they would have come up today and focused far more on shooting than the skills that made them who they were.  They'd be completely different players.

Not overly, they would replace the long 2s with 3s. They would have improved efficiency with higher point scoring totals, imo.

[Jvalin]

Can't post in the ''How Does My Team Look'' thread. Is it locked? Anyway, I'm posting here.

@mods
Feel free to move the post to the other thread.

Seeking for opinions about my squad, or advice on what type of players should I get to improve it.

I've never watched Dandridge, Porter and Gus Williams play. I started following the NBA in the mid/late 90s, but I was just a little kid at the time. That being said, I read your previous post carefully. Your comps for Dandridge and Porter are intriguing to say the least: Paul Pierce and Chauncey Billups. Wow!

If your comps are indicative of their skill set, then you got one of the best teams in the draft.

PG: Billups
SG: Butler
SF: Pierce
PF: Draymond
C: Gobert

I'm with Rody regarding Draymond's shooting. Sure, he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game that season, but that's just 1 season. His career average is 31.9% from 3 on 2.8 attempts per game. Can't take the 38.8 number at face value, much less given that he was playing next to Steph and Klay. He got tons of wide open looks next to them.

All in all, I believe you have built a very balanced team. Best defensive team in the draft, no doubt about that.

[gouki88]

Can't post in the ''How Does My Team Look'' thread. Is it locked? Anyway, I'm posting here.

@mods
Feel free to move the post to other thread.

Seeking for opinions about my squad, or advice on what type of players should I get to improve it.

I've never watched Dandridge, Porter and Gus Williams play. I started following the NBA in the mid/late 90s, but I was just a little kid at the time. That being said, I read your previous post carefully. Your comps for Dandridge and Porter are intriguing to say the least: Paul Pierce and Chauncey Billups. Wow!

If your comps are indicative of their skill set, then you got one of the best teams in the draft.

PG: Billups
SG: Butler
SF: Pierce
PF: Draymond
C: Gobert

I'm with Rody regarding Draymond's shooting. Sure, he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game that season, but that's just 1 season. His career average is 31.9% from 3 on 2.8 attempts per game. Can't take the 38.8 number at face value, much less given that he was playing next to Steph and Klay. He got tons of wide open looks next to them.

All in all, I believe you have built a very balanced team. Best defensive team in the draft, no doubt about that.

Not sure why it was locked - fixed it!

[Somebody]

Can't post in the ''How Does My Team Look'' thread. Is it locked? Anyway, I'm posting here.

@mods
Feel free to move the post to the other thread.

Seeking for opinions about my squad, or advice on what type of players should I get to improve it.

I've never watched Dandridge, Porter and Gus Williams play. I started following the NBA in the mid/late 90s, but I was just a little kid at the time. That being said, I read your previous post carefully. Your comps for Dandridge and Porter are intriguing to say the least: Paul Pierce and Chauncey Billups. Wow!

If your comps are indicative of their skill set, then you got one of the best teams in the draft.

PG: Billups
SG: Butler
SF: Pierce
PF: Draymond
C: Gobert

I'm with Rody regarding Draymond's shooting. Sure, he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game that season, but that's just 1 season. His career average is 31.9% from 3 on 2.8 attempts per game. Can't take the 38.8 number at face value, much less given that he was playing next to Steph and Klay. He got tons of wide open looks next to them.

All in all, I believe you have built a very balanced team. Best defensive team in the draft, no doubt about that.

I disagree regarding Draymond, I'll just paste my post defending his shooting ability here:

I suggest you take a closer look at Draymond's work in 2016 - he was a legitimate three point threat who burnt teams when they sagged off of him (he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game and came up huge in the playoffs against non-OKC teams when he didn't need to bang with 2-3 bigs all by himself: he averaged 38.9 on 3.6 attempts in 5 games against Houston, 43.3% on 6 attempts in 5 games against Portland and 40.6% on 5.3 attempts in 7 games against Cleveland). It wasn't like it was a one-season wonder as well - he shot 34.4% from 3 on 3.6 attempts per game from 2015-2017 in the RS and averaged the same percentage on 4.4 attempts per game in the same span in the playoffs. This is clearly at least a slightly above league average shooter on high volume (remember that bigs weren't shooting 5, 6, 7+ threes until the last season or two) and he really has the look of a strong big man floor spacer in 2016. The claim that he was shooting them with no one around him is simply false: a quick look at the tape would show that he was used as a pop big and was a real target for kickouts before his decline. Teams respected his jumpshot well enough that some would have a big stuck onto him and close out on him quickly in defensive rotations, giving Draymond the spacing effect that stretch bigs had on offence

[Moranis]

watching old highlights and remembering the game and how physical it used to be, I find it hard to believe that most of the old school guys wouldnt dominate in todays nba with the soft rules.

Also, Put Lebron back in the late 80 and early 90s and he would have quit the game.

Some guys, yes. But those that used extra physical means to be more successful than their basketball abilities would allow them to be, wouldn't be as good. Most of those guys would be collecting flagrant fouls on the regular making them less playable and less effective.

Naw, they would tame it down. I was thinking more about the scorers from back in the day. With no handchecking etc, they would have so much of an easier time.

Imagine Dr J Today? OR Gervin? English? Man they would score 35+ ppg.

no they wouldn't because they would have come up today and focused far more on shooting than the skills that made them who they were.  They'd be completely different players.

Not overly, they would replace the long 2s with 3s. They would have improved efficiency with higher point scoring totals, imo.

except you can look at the league today and know that just isn't true.  Where are all they great low post scorers?  There are very few of them today, because that isn't how they learned basketball.  Sure someone like my guy Malone would have 3 point range today, but he wouldn't be the physical beast in the post either because that isn't how he would have learned the game.  He'd have been brought up with ball handling, shooting, etc., but not the post moves, rebounding prowess, etc.  And you know this because you can look at the modern PF's and see that is true.  The inverse is also true.  Someone like Towns would have been an incredible low post scorer in the 80's.  He'd have been almost McHale like given his frame, athleticism, etc., but he wouldn't be a guy just pulling up for 3's and hitting them at an incredible rate either.  You can't have the best of both worlds.  If you want to input a guy into modern basketball, you can't just keep their old time skills because they wouldn't have them. 

[Moranis]

Can't post in the ''How Does My Team Look'' thread. Is it locked? Anyway, I'm posting here.

@mods
Feel free to move the post to the other thread.

Seeking for opinions about my squad, or advice on what type of players should I get to improve it.

I've never watched Dandridge, Porter and Gus Williams play. I started following the NBA in the mid/late 90s, but I was just a little kid at the time. That being said, I read your previous post carefully. Your comps for Dandridge and Porter are intriguing to say the least: Paul Pierce and Chauncey Billups. Wow!

If your comps are indicative of their skill set, then you got one of the best teams in the draft.

PG: Billups
SG: Butler
SF: Pierce
PF: Draymond
C: Gobert

I'm with Rody regarding Draymond's shooting. Sure, he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game that season, but that's just 1 season. His career average is 31.9% from 3 on 2.8 attempts per game. Can't take the 38.8 number at face value, much less given that he was playing next to Steph and Klay. He got tons of wide open looks next to them.

All in all, I believe you have built a very balanced team. Best defensive team in the draft, no doubt about that.

I disagree regarding Draymond, I'll just paste my post defending his shooting ability here:

I suggest you take a closer look at Draymond's work in 2016 - he was a legitimate three point threat who burnt teams when they sagged off of him (he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game and came up huge in the playoffs against non-OKC teams when he didn't need to bang with 2-3 bigs all by himself: he averaged 38.9 on 3.6 attempts in 5 games against Houston, 43.3% on 6 attempts in 5 games against Portland and 40.6% on 5.3 attempts in 7 games against Cleveland). It wasn't like it was a one-season wonder as well - he shot 34.4% from 3 on 3.6 attempts per game from 2015-2017 in the RS and averaged the same percentage on 4.4 attempts per game in the same span in the playoffs. This is clearly at least a slightly above league average shooter on high volume (remember that bigs weren't shooting 5, 6, 7+ threes until the last season or two) and he really has the look of a strong big man floor spacer in 2016. The claim that he was shooting them with no one around him is simply false: a quick look at the tape would show that he was used as a pop big and was a real target for kickouts before his decline. Teams respected his jumpshot well enough that some would have a big stuck onto him and close out on him quickly in defensive rotations, giving Draymond the spacing effect that stretch bigs had on offence

But it is a one year fluke in otherwise poor to mediocre shooting career.  That is like someone claiming Magic Johnson was a really good shooter because he had that one year late in his career where he shot 38.4% on 3.5 attempts even though the two surrounding seasons were 31.4 and 32.0 and he never really showed shooting touch earlier. 

People aren't just going to look at Draymond and call him anything other than a poor shooter, because that is what he was.  And I get that we are using only one season, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to think about the other seasons when they think of who the player was.

[nickagneta]

Can't post in the ''How Does My Team Look'' thread. Is it locked? Anyway, I'm posting here.

@mods
Feel free to move the post to the other thread.

Seeking for opinions about my squad, or advice on what type of players should I get to improve it.

I've never watched Dandridge, Porter and Gus Williams play. I started following the NBA in the mid/late 90s, but I was just a little kid at the time. That being said, I read your previous post carefully. Your comps for Dandridge and Porter are intriguing to say the least: Paul Pierce and Chauncey Billups. Wow!

If your comps are indicative of their skill set, then you got one of the best teams in the draft.

PG: Billups
SG: Butler
SF: Pierce
PF: Draymond
C: Gobert

I'm with Rody regarding Draymond's shooting. Sure, he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game that season, but that's just 1 season. His career average is 31.9% from 3 on 2.8 attempts per game. Can't take the 38.8 number at face value, much less given that he was playing next to Steph and Klay. He got tons of wide open looks next to them.

All in all, I believe you have built a very balanced team. Best defensive team in the draft, no doubt about that.

I disagree regarding Draymond, I'll just paste my post defending his shooting ability here:

I suggest you take a closer look at Draymond's work in 2016 - he was a legitimate three point threat who burnt teams when they sagged off of him (he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game and came up huge in the playoffs against non-OKC teams when he didn't need to bang with 2-3 bigs all by himself: he averaged 38.9 on 3.6 attempts in 5 games against Houston, 43.3% on 6 attempts in 5 games against Portland and 40.6% on 5.3 attempts in 7 games against Cleveland). It wasn't like it was a one-season wonder as well - he shot 34.4% from 3 on 3.6 attempts per game from 2015-2017 in the RS and averaged the same percentage on 4.4 attempts per game in the same span in the playoffs. This is clearly at least a slightly above league average shooter on high volume (remember that bigs weren't shooting 5, 6, 7+ threes until the last season or two) and he really has the look of a strong big man floor spacer in 2016. The claim that he was shooting them with no one around him is simply false: a quick look at the tape would show that he was used as a pop big and was a real target for kickouts before his decline. Teams respected his jumpshot well enough that some would have a big stuck onto him and close out on him quickly in defensive rotations, giving Draymond the spacing effect that stretch bigs had on offence

But it is a one year fluke in otherwise poor to mediocre shooting career.  That is like someone claiming Magic Johnson was a really good shooter because he had that one year late in his career where he shot 38.4% on 3.5 attempts even though the two surrounding seasons were 31.4 and 32.0 and he never really showed shooting touch earlier. 

People aren't just going to look at Draymond and call him anything other than a poor shooter, because that is what he was.  And I get that we are using only one season, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to think about the other seasons when they think of who the player was.

The spirit of the game is that the season picked is important because players have up and down years and years with injury. Take a guy like Grant Hill. Which year you select makes a massive difference. Most remember the player he was most of his career because he was pretty good, but he was special before the injury.

Magic and Draymond had a season or two where they shot the three at a good rate. You select that year and though they weren't noted to be good outside shooters, they were in those seasons and that should be how they are judged.

Of course, you can't force people to not consider a player's entire career, but the original concept of choosing one year was that the way the player performed in that season mattered. And so, if they had a career year in shooting, or rebounding, or scoring that is how the player should be perceived.

You can't make people judge things in that manner, but that is the way the game was designed. And if people aren't going to judge it that way, what's the sense of picking a year.

[Jvalin]

Can't post in the ''How Does My Team Look'' thread. Is it locked? Anyway, I'm posting here.

@mods
Feel free to move the post to the other thread.

Seeking for opinions about my squad, or advice on what type of players should I get to improve it.

I've never watched Dandridge, Porter and Gus Williams play. I started following the NBA in the mid/late 90s, but I was just a little kid at the time. That being said, I read your previous post carefully. Your comps for Dandridge and Porter are intriguing to say the least: Paul Pierce and Chauncey Billups. Wow!

If your comps are indicative of their skill set, then you got one of the best teams in the draft.

PG: Billups
SG: Butler
SF: Pierce
PF: Draymond
C: Gobert

I'm with Rody regarding Draymond's shooting. Sure, he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game that season, but that's just 1 season. His career average is 31.9% from 3 on 2.8 attempts per game. Can't take the 38.8 number at face value, much less given that he was playing next to Steph and Klay. He got tons of wide open looks next to them.

All in all, I believe you have built a very balanced team. Best defensive team in the draft, no doubt about that.

I disagree regarding Draymond, I'll just paste my post defending his shooting ability here:

I suggest you take a closer look at Draymond's work in 2016 - he was a legitimate three point threat who burnt teams when they sagged off of him (he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game and came up huge in the playoffs against non-OKC teams when he didn't need to bang with 2-3 bigs all by himself: he averaged 38.9 on 3.6 attempts in 5 games against Houston, 43.3% on 6 attempts in 5 games against Portland and 40.6% on 5.3 attempts in 7 games against Cleveland). It wasn't like it was a one-season wonder as well - he shot 34.4% from 3 on 3.6 attempts per game from 2015-2017 in the RS and averaged the same percentage on 4.4 attempts per game in the same span in the playoffs. This is clearly at least a slightly above league average shooter on high volume (remember that bigs weren't shooting 5, 6, 7+ threes until the last season or two) and he really has the look of a strong big man floor spacer in 2016. The claim that he was shooting them with no one around him is simply false: a quick look at the tape would show that he was used as a pop big and was a real target for kickouts before his decline. Teams respected his jumpshot well enough that some would have a big stuck onto him and close out on him quickly in defensive rotations, giving Draymond the spacing effect that stretch bigs had on offence

But it is a one year fluke in otherwise poor to mediocre shooting career.  That is like someone claiming Magic Johnson was a really good shooter because he had that one year late in his career where he shot 38.4% on 3.5 attempts even though the two surrounding seasons were 31.4 and 32.0 and he never really showed shooting touch earlier. 

People aren't just going to look at Draymond and call him anything other than a poor shooter, because that is what he was.  And I get that we are using only one season, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to think about the other seasons when they think of who the player was.

The spirit of the game is that the season picked is important because players have up and down years and years with injury. Take a guy like Grant Hill. Which year you select makes a massive difference. Most remember the player he was most of his career because he was pretty good, but he was special before the injury.

Magic and Draymond had a season or two where they shot the three at a good rate. You select that year and though they weren't noted to be good outside shooters, they were in those seasons and that should be how they are judged.

Of course, you can't force people to not consider a player's entire career, but the original concept of choosing one year was that the way the player performed in that season mattered. And so, if they had a career year in shooting, or rebounding, or scoring that is how the player should be perceived.

You can't make people judge things in that manner, but that is the way the game was designed. And if people aren't going to judge it that way, what's the sense of picking a year.

Personally speaking, I rarely look which season gets selected for each player. Obviously, Grant Hill is an exception. Most of the times, I just assume that all players are in their prime.

The way I see it, team fit matters way more than shooting% from a single season. Draymond was shooting 38.8% from 3 next to Steph and Klay. None of the players in Somebody's team can replicate what Steph and Klay were doing for the Warriors that season.

For instance, the Bulls have 2 of the greatest shooters of all time in their backcourt: Mark Price and Drazen Petrovic. If Draymond had been drafted by the Bulls, we would have been having a way different conversation. I could definitely buy the argument that he would have been a 38% shooter next to Price and Drazen.

[Somebody]

Can't post in the ''How Does My Team Look'' thread. Is it locked? Anyway, I'm posting here.

@mods
Feel free to move the post to the other thread.

Seeking for opinions about my squad, or advice on what type of players should I get to improve it.

I've never watched Dandridge, Porter and Gus Williams play. I started following the NBA in the mid/late 90s, but I was just a little kid at the time. That being said, I read your previous post carefully. Your comps for Dandridge and Porter are intriguing to say the least: Paul Pierce and Chauncey Billups. Wow!

If your comps are indicative of their skill set, then you got one of the best teams in the draft.

PG: Billups
SG: Butler
SF: Pierce
PF: Draymond
C: Gobert

I'm with Rody regarding Draymond's shooting. Sure, he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game that season, but that's just 1 season. His career average is 31.9% from 3 on 2.8 attempts per game. Can't take the 38.8 number at face value, much less given that he was playing next to Steph and Klay. He got tons of wide open looks next to them.

All in all, I believe you have built a very balanced team. Best defensive team in the draft, no doubt about that.

I disagree regarding Draymond, I'll just paste my post defending his shooting ability here:

I suggest you take a closer look at Draymond's work in 2016 - he was a legitimate three point threat who burnt teams when they sagged off of him (he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game and came up huge in the playoffs against non-OKC teams when he didn't need to bang with 2-3 bigs all by himself: he averaged 38.9 on 3.6 attempts in 5 games against Houston, 43.3% on 6 attempts in 5 games against Portland and 40.6% on 5.3 attempts in 7 games against Cleveland). It wasn't like it was a one-season wonder as well - he shot 34.4% from 3 on 3.6 attempts per game from 2015-2017 in the RS and averaged the same percentage on 4.4 attempts per game in the same span in the playoffs. This is clearly at least a slightly above league average shooter on high volume (remember that bigs weren't shooting 5, 6, 7+ threes until the last season or two) and he really has the look of a strong big man floor spacer in 2016. The claim that he was shooting them with no one around him is simply false: a quick look at the tape would show that he was used as a pop big and was a real target for kickouts before his decline. Teams respected his jumpshot well enough that some would have a big stuck onto him and close out on him quickly in defensive rotations, giving Draymond the spacing effect that stretch bigs had on offence

But it is a one year fluke in otherwise poor to mediocre shooting career.  That is like someone claiming Magic Johnson was a really good shooter because he had that one year late in his career where he shot 38.4% on 3.5 attempts even though the two surrounding seasons were 31.4 and 32.0 and he never really showed shooting touch earlier. 

People aren't just going to look at Draymond and call him anything other than a poor shooter, because that is what he was. And I get that we are using only one season, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to think about the other seasons when they think of who the player was.

You've probably missed the part where I said his average for those 3 seasons was a very respectable percentage on pretty high volume for a big, but hey it's a one year fluke when he averaged 33.7% on over 4 attempts per game in 2015 and he went on fire in a long 2017 playoff run after a down RS shooting year . And no one would say that Magic would be a really good shooter because of a couple of things: he sucked in the playoffs when defences honed in on his shot with a sub .300 percentage in those final 3 seasons on average and he played point guard so the bar for him being a good shooter relative to his position is higher.

People who look at prime Draymond and call him a poor shooter aren't being correct about who he was, they're making a very wrong statement about a player who is a facsimile of who he was for a multi-year stretch

[Somebody]

Can't post in the ''How Does My Team Look'' thread. Is it locked? Anyway, I'm posting here.

@mods
Feel free to move the post to the other thread.

Seeking for opinions about my squad, or advice on what type of players should I get to improve it.

I've never watched Dandridge, Porter and Gus Williams play. I started following the NBA in the mid/late 90s, but I was just a little kid at the time. That being said, I read your previous post carefully. Your comps for Dandridge and Porter are intriguing to say the least: Paul Pierce and Chauncey Billups. Wow!

If your comps are indicative of their skill set, then you got one of the best teams in the draft.

PG: Billups
SG: Butler
SF: Pierce
PF: Draymond
C: Gobert

I'm with Rody regarding Draymond's shooting. Sure, he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game that season, but that's just 1 season. His career average is 31.9% from 3 on 2.8 attempts per game. Can't take the 38.8 number at face value, much less given that he was playing next to Steph and Klay. He got tons of wide open looks next to them.

All in all, I believe you have built a very balanced team. Best defensive team in the draft, no doubt about that.

I disagree regarding Draymond, I'll just paste my post defending his shooting ability here:

I suggest you take a closer look at Draymond's work in 2016 - he was a legitimate three point threat who burnt teams when they sagged off of him (he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game and came up huge in the playoffs against non-OKC teams when he didn't need to bang with 2-3 bigs all by himself: he averaged 38.9 on 3.6 attempts in 5 games against Houston, 43.3% on 6 attempts in 5 games against Portland and 40.6% on 5.3 attempts in 7 games against Cleveland). It wasn't like it was a one-season wonder as well - he shot 34.4% from 3 on 3.6 attempts per game from 2015-2017 in the RS and averaged the same percentage on 4.4 attempts per game in the same span in the playoffs. This is clearly at least a slightly above league average shooter on high volume (remember that bigs weren't shooting 5, 6, 7+ threes until the last season or two) and he really has the look of a strong big man floor spacer in 2016. The claim that he was shooting them with no one around him is simply false: a quick look at the tape would show that he was used as a pop big and was a real target for kickouts before his decline. Teams respected his jumpshot well enough that some would have a big stuck onto him and close out on him quickly in defensive rotations, giving Draymond the spacing effect that stretch bigs had on offence

But it is a one year fluke in otherwise poor to mediocre shooting career.  That is like someone claiming Magic Johnson was a really good shooter because he had that one year late in his career where he shot 38.4% on 3.5 attempts even though the two surrounding seasons were 31.4 and 32.0 and he never really showed shooting touch earlier. 

People aren't just going to look at Draymond and call him anything other than a poor shooter, because that is what he was.  And I get that we are using only one season, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to think about the other seasons when they think of who the player was.

The spirit of the game is that the season picked is important because players have up and down years and years with injury. Take a guy like Grant Hill. Which year you select makes a massive difference. Most remember the player he was most of his career because he was pretty good, but he was special before the injury.

Magic and Draymond had a season or two where they shot the three at a good rate. You select that year and though they weren't noted to be good outside shooters, they were in those seasons and that should be how they are judged.

Of course, you can't force people to not consider a player's entire career, but the original concept of choosing one year was that the way the player performed in that season mattered. And so, if they had a career year in shooting, or rebounding, or scoring that is how the player should be perceived.

You can't make people judge things in that manner, but that is the way the game was designed. And if people aren't going to judge it that way, what's the sense of picking a year.

Personally speaking, I rarely look which season gets selected for each player. Obviously, Grant Hill is an exception. Most of the times, I just assume that all players are in their prime.

At the end of the day, fit matters. Draymond was shooting 38% from 3 next to Steph and Klay. None of the players in Somebody's team can replicate what Steph and Klay were doing for the Warriors that season.

For instance, the Bulls have 2 of the greatest shooters of all time in their backcourt: Mark Price and Drazen Petrovic. If Draymond had been drafted by the Bulls, we would be having a way different discussion. I could definitely buy the argument that he would have been a 38% shooter next to Price and Drazen.

Klay wasn't really creating a ton for Draymond though, sure he had off-ball gravity but it opened up easy layups for Green rather than open threes. Curry definitely created loads for Draymond, but is it really difficult for say Jimmy Butler, Bob Dandridge or Gus Williams (heck throw in Terry Porter as well, he isn't as good as those guys on the ball but his driving drew a healthy amount of fouls in the playoffs, it clearly strained defences) to draw multiple defenders off penetration in isolation or the PnP/PnR? I think it's fair to say that our off-ball movement wouldn't be as potent as Golden State, but Draymond's threes were mostly created by on-ball work drawing defenders inside rather than off-ball tethering.

[Jvalin]

Can't post in the ''How Does My Team Look'' thread. Is it locked? Anyway, I'm posting here.

@mods
Feel free to move the post to the other thread.

Seeking for opinions about my squad, or advice on what type of players should I get to improve it.

I've never watched Dandridge, Porter and Gus Williams play. I started following the NBA in the mid/late 90s, but I was just a little kid at the time. That being said, I read your previous post carefully. Your comps for Dandridge and Porter are intriguing to say the least: Paul Pierce and Chauncey Billups. Wow!

If your comps are indicative of their skill set, then you got one of the best teams in the draft.

PG: Billups
SG: Butler
SF: Pierce
PF: Draymond
C: Gobert

I'm with Rody regarding Draymond's shooting. Sure, he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game that season, but that's just 1 season. His career average is 31.9% from 3 on 2.8 attempts per game. Can't take the 38.8 number at face value, much less given that he was playing next to Steph and Klay. He got tons of wide open looks next to them.

All in all, I believe you have built a very balanced team. Best defensive team in the draft, no doubt about that.

I disagree regarding Draymond, I'll just paste my post defending his shooting ability here:

I suggest you take a closer look at Draymond's work in 2016 - he was a legitimate three point threat who burnt teams when they sagged off of him (he shot 38.8% from 3 on 3.2 attempts per game and came up huge in the playoffs against non-OKC teams when he didn't need to bang with 2-3 bigs all by himself: he averaged 38.9 on 3.6 attempts in 5 games against Houston, 43.3% on 6 attempts in 5 games against Portland and 40.6% on 5.3 attempts in 7 games against Cleveland). It wasn't like it was a one-season wonder as well - he shot 34.4% from 3 on 3.6 attempts per game from 2015-2017 in the RS and averaged the same percentage on 4.4 attempts per game in the same span in the playoffs. This is clearly at least a slightly above league average shooter on high volume (remember that bigs weren't shooting 5, 6, 7+ threes until the last season or two) and he really has the look of a strong big man floor spacer in 2016. The claim that he was shooting them with no one around him is simply false: a quick look at the tape would show that he was used as a pop big and was a real target for kickouts before his decline. Teams respected his jumpshot well enough that some would have a big stuck onto him and close out on him quickly in defensive rotations, giving Draymond the spacing effect that stretch bigs had on offence

But it is a one year fluke in otherwise poor to mediocre shooting career.  That is like someone claiming Magic Johnson was a really good shooter because he had that one year late in his career where he shot 38.4% on 3.5 attempts even though the two surrounding seasons were 31.4 and 32.0 and he never really showed shooting touch earlier. 

People aren't just going to look at Draymond and call him anything other than a poor shooter, because that is what he was.  And I get that we are using only one season, but that doesn't mean people aren't going to think about the other seasons when they think of who the player was.

The spirit of the game is that the season picked is important because players have up and down years and years with injury. Take a guy like Grant Hill. Which year you select makes a massive difference. Most remember the player he was most of his career because he was pretty good, but he was special before the injury.

Magic and Draymond had a season or two where they shot the three at a good rate. You select that year and though they weren't noted to be good outside shooters, they were in those seasons and that should be how they are judged.

Of course, you can't force people to not consider a player's entire career, but the original concept of choosing one year was that the way the player performed in that season mattered. And so, if they had a career year in shooting, or rebounding, or scoring that is how the player should be perceived.

You can't make people judge things in that manner, but that is the way the game was designed. And if people aren't going to judge it that way, what's the sense of picking a year.

Personally speaking, I rarely look which season gets selected for each player. Obviously, Grant Hill is an exception. Most of the times, I just assume that all players are in their prime.

At the end of the day, fit matters. Draymond was shooting 38% from 3 next to Steph and Klay. None of the players in Somebody's team can replicate what Steph and Klay were doing for the Warriors that season.

For instance, the Bulls have 2 of the greatest shooters of all time in their backcourt: Mark Price and Drazen Petrovic. If Draymond had been drafted by the Bulls, we would be having a way different discussion. I could definitely buy the argument that he would have been a 38% shooter next to Price and Drazen.

Klay wasn't really creating a ton for Draymond though, sure he had off-ball gravity but it opened up easy layups for Green rather than open threes. Curry definitely created loads for Draymond, but is it really difficult for say Jimmy Butler, Bob Dandridge or Gus Williams (heck throw in Terry Porter as well, he isn't as good as those guys on the ball but his driving drew a healthy amount of fouls in the playoffs, it clearly strained defences) to draw multiple defenders off penetration in isolation or the PnP/PnR? I think it's fair to say that our off-ball movement wouldn't be as potent as Golden State, but Draymond's threes were mostly created by on-ball work drawing defenders inside rather than off-ball tethering.

Klay is an off-ball specialist. He opens up the court for all kinds of opportunities. You said it yourself: ''he had off-ball gravity''.

My point is that the Warriors situation was literally the perfect situation for Draymond. If it weren't for Steph and Klay, I don't think he would have been shooting 38.8% from 3. Obviously, you don't have Steph and Klay, hence I don't think he would have been shooting 38.8% from 3 in your team.

[nickagneta]

Willing to talk trade for anyone on my team not name Giannis and draft picks as well.

Might give people something to think and talk about until Monday.

PM me with any interests. My players and picks are in my sig.