2020 Historic Draft: How’s My Team Look: Conference Finals winners announced!!

[Somebody]

Some surprising choices of seasons for a few players I noticed:
Kobe 2002-03 -- I would have expected one of his 5 championship seasons
DWade 2008-09 -- I thought 2005-06 was a lock originally, but upon further thought this isn't a bad choice at all
Carmelo 2012-13 -- I thought 2008-09 was his best season when he took Denver to the WCF
Jordan 2002-03 -- I guess he has better shooting %s this season than the one prior but I have trouble saying 39-year-old MJ is better than 38-year-old MJ.  Hard to remember any real difference though.
Tim Duncan 2001-02 -- Nitpicking here maybe but I would have chosen the season after when he won MVP AND the title.
Eric Bledsoe 2019-20 -- I think his peak was like 4-5 years ago which if I'm bringing him off the bench in a small role is the Eric Bledsoe that I want
Iverson 2004-05 -- I think if you draft him then you use him for his best and IMO his best was 2000-01.  But I guess he was a pretty similar player over that 4 year span and maybe I'm just weighing an MVP award too heavily here.

His 2002 season was arguably more impressive (I have them as nearly identical years) from a statistical standpoint. Would choose '03 due to a sustained playoff sample though.

[RodyTur10]

Some guys rate my Miami team, but I get the impression I don't have a shot at the Playoffs (think my flexible and versatile team could grind out a lot of wins against high quality teams though).

I still like my team though, and the only thing I would have done different in hindsight (given how the draft turned out) is that I'd have taken #16 George and #41 Jokic (instead of #16 D.Howard and #41 J.Butler).

In that case my team would have looked like this:

Paul/Roy/George/Kirilenko/Jokic (2nd unit: Arenas/J.Howard/Lewis or Pippen/Love/Jordan)

Would that have made a difference?

It really was a bummer that Donoghus took Anthony Davis (I wanted to unite the two Pelicans stars). Then my reasoning was that I'd better take the 2nd best center in the draft (after O'Neal) than go for like the 6th best wing and play catch-up. With the Paul-Howard combo I knew I could build an elite defense, while knowing that there were enough excellent offensive powerhouses available to draft later on.

(Before the draft started I contemplated if I should try to go for Harden(#16)/Davis(#13) pick-and-roll as devastating weapon, but then Chris Paul fell and it was an easy decision for me. Think Paul is a bit underrated. The only guys who have had 17+ WS a season this century are: James, Durant, O'Neal, Garnett, Paul, Curry, Duncan and Nowitzki. In like any advanced metric Paul is in that elite company and he definitely got robbed from a MVP-award by a more marketable Bryant in '08)

[Somebody]

Some guys rate my Miami team, but I get the impression I don't have a shot at the Playoffs (think my flexible and versatile team could grind out a lot of wins against high quality teams though).

I still like my team though, and the only thing I would have done different in hindsight (given how the draft turned out) is that I'd have taken #16 George and #41 Jokic (instead of #16 D.Howard and #41 J.Butler).

In that case my team would have looked like this:

Paul/Roy/George/Kirilenko/Jokic (2nd unit: Arenas/J.Howard/Lewis or Pippen/Love/Jordan)

Would that have made a difference?

It really was a bummer that Donoghus took Anthony Davis (I wanted to unite the two Pelicans stars). Then my reasoning was that I'd better take the 2nd best center in the draft (after O'Neal) than go for like the 6th best wing and play catch-up. With the Paul-Howard combo I knew I could build an elite defense, while knowing that there were enough excellent offensive powerhouses available to draft later on.

(Before the draft started I contemplated if I should try to go for Harden(#16)/Davis(#13) pick-and-roll as devastating weapon, but then Chris Paul fell and it was an easy decision for me. Think Paul is a bit underrated. The only guys who have had 17+ WS a season this century are: James, Durant, O'Neal, Garnett, Paul, Curry, Duncan and Nowitzki. In like any advanced metric Paul is in that elite company and he definitely got robbed from a MVP-award by a more marketable Bryant in '08)

The East is just ridiculously stacked lol.

[Somebody]

Here is my explanation for the rankings I posted earlier:

1. Boston Celtics
Just a dominant offence and good enough defence to credibly defend most teams in this draft. I think a Nash-led offence with KD as his sidekick will shred any defence that isn't elite in this format, and the supporting cast that Who picked (besides his SG rotation) is really good as well. I see holes in their team, but I think their offence will be so good that it doesn't matter.

2. Milwaukee Bucks
I liked how their pieces fit together as I started comparing them to other teams - I had no idea how funky the fit on some teams were. The team just works on both ends of the floor - Malone isn't a defensive monster as a big man, but he has Giannis as a help defender, and their offence is good enough with Malone, Ginobili and Giannis being the main pieces (I somewhat question the offensive fit of Giannis and Malone, but it shouldn't be too much of an issue with Malone's ability to space the floor somewhat). Their bench also has a few nice plug and play pieces - I like Rose as a bench guard, Tatum is an excellent backup forward in this format and Ibaka is a nice Malone backup to keep on bludgeoning opposing frontcourts.

3. Miami Heat
Another team that I thought was well built. They're strong on both ends of the floor with CP3 quarterbacking an offence with excellent finishers in Love and Howard as his target men and they have a good second creator who can move off ball in Butler, while their defence has multiple plus defenders surrounding an elite rim protector who's mobile enough to defend the perimeter. Love is a defensive liability in some matchups, but they have the ability to play Josh Howard and AK47 as their forwards against teams that can take advantage of Love.

4. Los Angeles Clippers
Curry next to an excellent wing creator in Grant Hill already spells trouble for most defences, but Gouki managed to find an excellent shooter in Redd and a versatile big forward in Brand to make that offence even more potent. I don't love the fit of his team (I think he should've went for a guy like Sheed to start at C for him instead of Noah and gone for Miller instead of Redd), but it still works with how portable some of his pieces are + how versatile his bench is.

5. Brooklyn Nets
This team really surprised me when I started poring over the rosters and posts. I really like the McGrady/Davis duo and Dons' decision to bench Yao (as sad as it was for me) was an excellent move. The Matrix and Davis cover Griffin's subpar defence well, and even though I'm not a fan of Andre Miller/AI/CJ as PG options, I think McGrady will take on the bulk of PG duties to minimise the burden of PGs on the team. Their bench (a recurring theme among the top teams) also allows them to shift their lineups against different matchups: I love Battier as a backup SG/SF, CJ/AI are interesting bench guards who can explode on offence and having Yao/Ratliff as their bench Cs is downright terrifying for more traditional teams.

6. Oklahoma City Thunder
Yoki went full alpha with bold 1st and 2nd round selections that dug himself a deep hole, but he made a furious comeback later on with savvy drafting and outright fleecing. Getting a volume scorer and an elite playmaker in Westbrook works wonders for their offence: it sounds weird considering that these players usually don't lead great offences, but Yoki's team desperately needed someone who can shoulder a heavy offensive load - Pierce and George are great wing scorers who are strong creators as well, but they weren't guys who could quarterback a good offence. Getting Russ raises the floor of their offence to a level where they're respectable in this format, while their defence will be in the upper echelon with one of the best defensive centres in this draft surrounded by versatile forwards and a cannonball of a guard.

7. Indiana Pacers
It took me a while to come around on this team, but I can see how it will win games in this league. Dirk's resilient scoring game will buoy the Indiana offence while guards like Tony Parker can break already-stretched defences with his ability to weave through tight spaces (the thought of a Parker-Nowitzki pick and pop is terrifying). Embiid is an awkward fit offensively, but he provides a monster low post option for Indiana to go to and isn't a complete zero at shooting (so he can stand in the corner when Dirk is initiating his high post offence). The defence has issues, but swapping out Hayward for Iguodala and Parker for Wall (who can still run the pick and pop with Dirk) would stop the bleeding just enough that they can get by the teams below them consistently.

8. Dallas Mavericks
I think their core three is excellent, but I dislike how they went about assembling the supporting cast. I don't like LMA's fit on the team at all, he's average defensively and takes the ball away from Kawhi/Doncic on offence. Mutombo is nice, but him and LMA in the frontcourt is just asking for opposing teams to shred them apart in the pick and roll. The bench pieces aren't all that inspiring either - Simmons is playing out of position as a PG (he should've been their starting PF) and there is no bench big who can guard both the post and the PnR. But their versatile offence with intriguing offensive pieces surrounding an MVP quarterback and an MVP calibre two way wing, as well as strong wing defence and rim protection is dangerous enough to land them here.

9. Utah Jazz
A team that I see had a lot of thought put into it but sadly didn't have enough to overtake the teams ranked ahead of it. Shaq is the best offensive centre ever (only Kareem was his contemporary imo), but I don't see this team giving him that secondary wing creator to boost that offence into transcendence. I love Reggie Miller, but him and Peja at the wings with Kidd as the PG limits O'Neal to doing floor raising rather than ceiling raising, and the bench mob doesn't really have a guy who can help out either (Monster Mash might be the answer to their offensive woes if he starts at PF, but the offence would still lag behind the best offences in this format). With a good but not great offence and problematic defence, the Jazz fall to 9th on my list.

10. Philadelphia 76ers
I like the idea of just drafting dependent talent for LeBron to supercharge, but having only Billups as your other creator in the starting lineup spells trouble even for the GOATiest of players. Drafting 3 power forwards instead of a centre who can defend the perimeter when Gobert gets run off the floor against five out offences also doesn't do them any favours. The bench is decent but I don't see it filling the holes in the starting lineup, so the 76ers plummet to number 10.

11. Denver Nuggets
I simply don't see how this offence competes against other teams in this format. The defence is top 3 imo with Duncan and Draymond in the frontcourt as well as a backcourt of Payton and Rip, but any offence that relies on the post scoring and kickouts of prime Tim Duncan is not going to win in this format - those early 00s Spurs teams were historically good on defence and just good enough on offence in their title runs. Kyrie alleviates this problem somewhat, but he's not an elite offensive centrepiece in this format and will make the perimeter defence with Melo at SF shaky.

12. Los Angeles Lakers
This was my PM to Celtic Fan Forever regarding his team:

Absolutely. I simply don't think that your offence is as good as it looks like on paper (fit issues), and the defence is problematic. I like big men like Jokic and Webber on offence, but the issue is that you're pairing them together and asking them to play with a ball dominant offensive engine in Kobe + a point guard who also needs the ball to maximise his offensive value in Lillard. I understand that Kobe and Lillard can move off ball a bit, but relegating both of them to an off ball role to maximise the offensive value of Webber and Jokic is madness: Kobe is one of the finest offensive engines in the history of the NBA (just a rung below the offensive GOATs imo) and Lillard has All-NBA impact solely with his offence. The ideal way I see your offence run is to give Kobe the reins and have Jokic act as his #2 (ala Pau Gasol), but this would relegate Webber to a stretch 4 role that's mainly tasked to finish scoring opportunities created by Kobe and Jokic, and that's not his strength at all. Lillard would fare better due to his shooting and off ball movement, but that's not his forte either. I see the argument that Webber would be able to provide value with extra passing, but that's meh value for a guy who you'll have to cover on defence (Webber is average at best on that end), ditto for Lillard even though he brings a couple of extra traits like floor spacing and quick burst isolation scoring.

So yeah that's pretty much it, I'm not a huge fan of how your pieces fit on offence and I really don't like your defence (you're basically asking Metta to cover 4 other guys in this format with your starting lineup).

13. Houston Rockets
Just an awful fit imo. Wade and Harden are incredibly ball dominant guards whose games don't fit together, and Houston exacerbated issues by hoarding power forwards and shooting guards in the first nine rounds. They had some really good picks in the final few rounds, but the damage was already done.

[Roy H.]

Thoughtful analysis, Somebody. 

[Somebody]

Thoughtful analysis, Somebody.

Thanks. I focused on looking at how do players get their stats irl and how do players fit together on teams for this draft.

[KGs Knee]

(LeBron, Shaq, Durant) ... are just simply on a tier above everyone else,

Other guys aside, I really think Tim Duncan has become underrated since his retirement.  He was better than Durant, and arguably Shaq.

Garnett as well, he was neck and neck with Duncan during his prime, and imo had the better two year apex.

If we are talking about career accomplishments, Duncan obviously rates very high, and probably a slight bit higher than Shaq.  But Shaq had a higher peak.  I'd rate Shaq's peak as comparable to LeBron's.  Duncan never quite reached that level, he was just very consistent for a long period of time.

At least for the purposes of this game, I'm more concerned with how high a player's peak was, than their overall career.  There has to be some balance there, otherwise a guy like IT and his one amazing season would have to be rated much higher, but I do give more importance to peak season over longevity.

Durant is probably the most overlooked player in this game, though.  He is clearly better than KG, Duncan, or Curry IMO.  In fact, I have Curry rated quite a bit lower in this game.  I don't think he would be any where near as effective in a league with bigger guards who could bully him.  Which, of course, is part of what makes Iverson so special.  He was even smaller than Curry but had way more heart and toughness.  If he played in today's NBA I think he'd definitely be rated above Curry.

I think for the purposes of this game my top 10 would be LeBron, Shaq, Durant, Garnett, Duncan, Malone, Kobe, Dirk, Iverson, Nash.

[Somebody]

(LeBron, Shaq, Durant) ... are just simply on a tier above everyone else,

Other guys aside, I really think Tim Duncan has become underrated since his retirement.  He was better than Durant, and arguably Shaq.

Garnett as well, he was neck and neck with Duncan during his prime, and imo had the better two year apex.

If we are talking about career accomplishments, Duncan obviously rates very high, and probably a slight bit higher than Shaq.  But Shaq had a higher peak.  I'd rate Shaq's peak as comparable to LeBron's.  Duncan never quite reached that level, he was just very consistent for a long period of time.

At least for the purposes of this game, I'm more concerned with how high a player's peak was, than their overall career.  There has to be some balance there, otherwise a guy like IT and his one amazing season would have to be rated much higher, but I do give more importance to peak season over longevity.

Durant is probably the most overlooked player in this game, though.  He is clearly better than KG, Duncan, or Curry IMO.  In fact, I have Curry rated quite a bit lower in this game.  I don't think he would be any where near as effective in a league with bigger guards who could bully him.  Which, of course, is part of what makes Iverson so special.  He was even smaller than Curry but had way more heart and toughness.  If he played in today's NBA I think he'd definitely be rated above Curry.

I think for the purposes of this game my top 10 would be LeBron, Shaq, Durant, Garnett, Duncan, Malone, Kobe, Dirk, Iverson, Nash.

I disagree with this take. I think Durant's playmaking limitations cap his offensive peak as a rung under the offensive GOATs and his defence doesn't add a ton of value to make up for it. I'd probably rate his peak as 6th best in this draft, behind Shaq, LeBron, Garnett, Curry and Duncan. I think Curry's off ball movement and hyper efficient offensive game would be even more valuable, people love to say that you can "bully" him to really eat into his offensive value but that has never really been proven to be true when he was healthy in the playoffs (see his 2017 playoff run).

[Donoghus]

Iverson 2004-05 -- I think if you draft him then you use him for his best and IMO his best was 2000-01.  But I guess he was a pretty similar player over that 4 year span and maybe I'm just weighing an MVP award too heavily here.

And most times I would.  However, given the role I was trying to find for him, I thought a bit older & maturer AI would be better.  Also, he was still 1st team All NBA and his numbers were pretty off the charts.   He also had double digit assists in the ASG that year which is another thing I wanted to indicate.  Showing the ability to be more team oriented.   

Essentially it was a chemistry decision without really sacrificing a heckuva lot on production.

[Roy H.]

(LeBron, Shaq, Durant) ... are just simply on a tier above everyone else,

Other guys aside, I really think Tim Duncan has become underrated since his retirement.  He was better than Durant, and arguably Shaq.

Garnett as well, he was neck and neck with Duncan during his prime, and imo had the better two year apex.

If we are talking about career accomplishments, Duncan obviously rates very high, and probably a slight bit higher than Shaq.  But Shaq had a higher peak.  I'd rate Shaq's peak as comparable to LeBron's.  Duncan never quite reached that level, he was just very consistent for a long period of time.

At least for the purposes of this game, I'm more concerned with how high a player's peak was, than their overall career.  There has to be some balance there, otherwise a guy like IT and his one amazing season would have to be rated much higher, but I do give more importance to peak season over longevity.

Durant is probably the most overlooked player in this game, though.  He is clearly better than KG, Duncan, or Curry IMO.  In fact, I have Curry rated quite a bit lower in this game.  I don't think he would be any where near as effective in a league with bigger guards who could bully him.  Which, of course, is part of what makes Iverson so special.  He was even smaller than Curry but had way more heart and toughness.  If he played in today's NBA I think he'd definitely be rated above Curry.

I think for the purposes of this game my top 10 would be LeBron, Shaq, Durant, Garnett, Duncan, Malone, Kobe, Dirk, Iverson, Nash.

I disagree with this take. I think Durant's playmaking limitations cap his offensive peak as a rung under the offensive GOATs and his defence doesn't add a ton of value to make up for it. I'd probably rate his peak as 6th best in this draft, behind Shaq, LeBron, Garnett, Curry and Duncan. I think Curry's off ball movement and hyper efficient offensive game would be even more valuable, people love to say that you can "bully" him to really eat into his offensive value but that has never really been proven to be true when he was healthy in the playoffs (see his 2017 playoff run).

I think you guys are both underrating Giannis. . You can’t go wrong with any of them, but Giannis is presumptively a back-to-back MVP and runner-up for DPOY.  The guy had a +20.0 difference between his offensive and defensive rating.  Hell, he’s made Eric Bledsoe and Brook Lopez look like two-way all-stars.

I’ve mentioned before, but my top five were LeBron, Shaq, Duncan, and then a tie for fourth between Durant and Giannis.  Even then, I might be underselling my own guy.  Can you imagine if Giannas played for the Warriors, surrounded by Steph, Klay and Draymond?

[Jvalin]

8. Dallas Mavericks
I don't like LMA's fit on the team at all, he's average defensively and takes the ball away from Kawhi/Doncic on offence.

The way I see it, LMA is an elite Pick & Pop big man. Him and Luka would form the best Pick & Pop duo in the league.

Mutombo is nice, but him and LMA in the frontcourt is just asking for opposing teams to shred them apart in the pick and roll.

Yep, we agree on this one. This is why I drafted Myles Turner as my 3rd string Center.

The bench pieces aren't all that inspiring either

This is where I disagree with pretty much all of you guys. Love my bench. Wouldn't change any of these players.

It's not about selecting as many stars as possible. It's about building a functional team. With this in mind, all teams need role players who are happy to play off the ball.  Bowen is an elite 3+D player. Korver is an elite sharpshooter. Horry is a great 3+D player who thrives under pressure. If you ask me, Korver, Bowen and Horry are 3 of the best role players in this draft.

Simmons is playing out of position as a PG (he should've been their starting PF)

If Simmons were the starting PF, he would have been a terrible fit next to Luka. I had him playing the PG position on offense and the PF position on defense.

9. Utah Jazz

Utah at #9? Wow! Imo, it's the best team in the league!

PS: We may disagree on most of these, but I love the criticism! Thanks for the feedback! TP!

My rankings were
1) Lebron
2) Shaq
3) Duncan

I had KG at #5 while only being a tad bit behind Duncan.

My top 4 was LeBron > Shaq >> KD > Duncan

I believe KG at #2 was a big reach. I'm a huge fan of KG's game, but imo Somebody should have traded down.

Off the top of my head, here are some of the steals of the draft (just my opinion):
- KD at #7
- Luka and Malone in the third round
- Jokic in the 4th round
- D-Rose in the tail end of the 5th round
- Siakam in the 6th round
- Boogie and Houston in the 7th round
- Finley and Stockton (even at the age of 37-38) in the 8th round

[Somebody]

(LeBron, Shaq, Durant) ... are just simply on a tier above everyone else,

Other guys aside, I really think Tim Duncan has become underrated since his retirement.  He was better than Durant, and arguably Shaq.

Garnett as well, he was neck and neck with Duncan during his prime, and imo had the better two year apex.

If we are talking about career accomplishments, Duncan obviously rates very high, and probably a slight bit higher than Shaq.  But Shaq had a higher peak.  I'd rate Shaq's peak as comparable to LeBron's.  Duncan never quite reached that level, he was just very consistent for a long period of time.

At least for the purposes of this game, I'm more concerned with how high a player's peak was, than their overall career.  There has to be some balance there, otherwise a guy like IT and his one amazing season would have to be rated much higher, but I do give more importance to peak season over longevity.

Durant is probably the most overlooked player in this game, though.  He is clearly better than KG, Duncan, or Curry IMO.  In fact, I have Curry rated quite a bit lower in this game.  I don't think he would be any where near as effective in a league with bigger guards who could bully him.  Which, of course, is part of what makes Iverson so special.  He was even smaller than Curry but had way more heart and toughness.  If he played in today's NBA I think he'd definitely be rated above Curry.

I think for the purposes of this game my top 10 would be LeBron, Shaq, Durant, Garnett, Duncan, Malone, Kobe, Dirk, Iverson, Nash.

I disagree with this take. I think Durant's playmaking limitations cap his offensive peak as a rung under the offensive GOATs and his defence doesn't add a ton of value to make up for it. I'd probably rate his peak as 6th best in this draft, behind Shaq, LeBron, Garnett, Curry and Duncan. I think Curry's off ball movement and hyper efficient offensive game would be even more valuable, people love to say that you can "bully" him to really eat into his offensive value but that has never really been proven to be true when he was healthy in the playoffs (see his 2017 playoff run).

I think you guys are both underrating Giannis. . You can’t go wrong with any of them, but Giannis is presumptively a back-to-back MVP and runner-up for DPOY.  The guy had a +20.0 difference between his offensive and defensive rating.  Hell, he’s made Eric Bledsoe and Brook Lopez look like two-way all-stars.

I’ve mentioned before, but my top five were LeBron, Shaq, Duncan, and then a tie for fourth between Durant and Giannis.  Even then, I might be underselling my own guy.  Can you imagine if Giannas played for the Warriors, surrounded by Steph, Klay and Draymond?

I mean you don't want to get into a + / - argument against Garnett - he's the king of + / - stats alongside LeBron. He hit +20.0 or higher in '04 and '08 in net on/off, and he kills it in play-by-play plus-minus data like APM and PI RAPM. He made Sam Cassell look like a top 10-15 player in '04 and Wally World look like an All-Star offensive weapon who's not a defensive liability.

[Somebody]

The way I see it, LMA is an elite Pick & Pop big man. Him and Luka would form the best Pick & Pop duo in the league.

I disagree unless you're pulling out his Spurs seasons (you're not) with a developed three point shot. The midrange exists as a counter against elite defences, not as a bread a butter scoring move.

Yep, we agree on this one. This is why I drafted Myles Turner as my 3rd string Center.

Which is nice, I took that into account in my rankings.

This is where I disagree with pretty much all of you guys. Love my bench. Wouldn't change any of these players.

It's not about selecting as many stars as possible. It's about building a functional team. With this in mind, all teams need role players who are happy to play off the ball.  Bowen is an elite 3+D player. Korver is an elite sharpshooter. Horry is great 3+D player who thrives under pressure. If you ask me, Korver, Bowen and Horry are 3 of the best role players in this draft.

As for Simmons, if he were the starting PF, he would have been a terrible fit next to Luka. I had him playing the PG position on offense and the PF position on defense.

You can't change it anyways . And no one was talking about selecting as many stars as possible - I simply disliked the general fit of those pieces. And why would Simmons fit terribly next to Luka? Dallas' insane offence this year uses Dwight Powell (an athletic rim runner who can't shoot) as a target man in the Luka PnR, Simmons can be that sort of guy on steroids with his passing ability and skill at finishing around the rim.

Utah at #9? Wow! Imo, it's the best team in the league!

PS: We may disagree on most of these, but I love the criticism! Thanks for the feedback!

Yeah I don't think their offence moves the needle when compared to the very best offences in this league, and they absolutely need their offence to be that good to make up for their defence.

My top 4 was LeBron > Shaq >> KD > Duncan

I believe KG at #2 was a big reach. I'm a huge fan of KG's game, but imo Somebody should have traded down.

Off the top of my head, here are some the steals of the draft (imo):
KD at #7, Luka and Malone in the third round, Jokic in the 4th round, D-Rose in the tail end of the 5th round, Siakam in the 6th round, Boogie in the 7th round, Finley and Stockton (even at the age of 37-38) in the 8th round.

Agree to disagree moment here, I think KG is criminally underrated in most NBA circles and it's a tragedy that he's not viewed as an equal to Duncan.

[Somebody]

Some guys rate my Miami team, but I get the impression I don't have a shot at the Playoffs (think my flexible and versatile team could grind out a lot of wins against high quality teams though).

I still like my team though, and the only thing I would have done different in hindsight (given how the draft turned out) is that I'd have taken #16 George and #41 Jokic (instead of #16 D.Howard and #41 J.Butler).

In that case my team would have looked like this:

Paul/Roy/George/Kirilenko/Jokic (2nd unit: Arenas/J.Howard/Lewis or Pippen/Love/Jordan)

Would that have made a difference?

It really was a bummer that Donoghus took Anthony Davis (I wanted to unite the two Pelicans stars). Then my reasoning was that I'd better take the 2nd best center in the draft (after O'Neal) than go for like the 6th best wing and play catch-up. With the Paul-Howard combo I knew I could build an elite defense, while knowing that there were enough excellent offensive powerhouses available to draft later on.

(Before the draft started I contemplated if I should try to go for Harden(#16)/Davis(#13) pick-and-roll as devastating weapon, but then Chris Paul fell and it was an easy decision for me. Think Paul is a bit underrated. The only guys who have had 17+ WS a season this century are: James, Durant, O'Neal, Garnett, Paul, Curry, Duncan and Nowitzki. In like any advanced metric Paul is in that elite company and he definitely got robbed from a MVP-award by a more marketable Bryant in '08)

No, you would've been worse off. Paul's a ball dominant engine, let him work with a good defensive team and decent offensive pieces who can provide good extra value. I think the big mistake was not picking Nash with your 1st instead of Paul, I see Nash as a player with a top 6 offensive peak ever who you can build a competitive team around by just surrounding him with 3 and D pieces.

[Roy H.]

Paul/Roy/George/Kirilenko/Jokic (2nd unit: Arenas/J.Howard/Lewis or Pippen/Love/Jordan)

Would that have made a difference?

Personally I would have loved that team.  It’s unfair to second guess yourself, but I love the fit of all the pieces, and the creativity you’d have to put different teams on the floor.  Plus, you’re removing two headaches in D12 and Butler.