2020 Historical Draft Thread: Draft over. Playoffs coming soon!

[nickagneta]

My backup C will be available for me next round.  So for an 11th man... if he falls that far on the depth chart... you need someone who can provide you something rare.  So I'm going to draft a guy that can be argued as perhaps the most qualified player in the entire draft to defend Steph Curry or James Harden.  Or Paul Milsap if you happen to need that.   

With pick 10(12) the Utah Jazz select the NBA league-leader in grit and combat muscles...



Marcus Smart

And with THAT pick THIS Fantastic Five



And THIS Fantastic Five



Have all been taken.

Love Smart...was looking at him next round.

The picture of the Current 5 is kinda interesting and funny. First, Brown looks huge, both tall and muscular wise. Both Hayward and Tatum are listed as taller than Brown, but it doesn't really look it in the photo.

Also, they all tried to have a serious look on but Smart and Brown appeared to put on a "time for me to kill you" look on. Would not want to meet either guy in a deal alley when they have that look on their faces.

[Roy H.]

I loved that dude.  They should just clone Mason and give every team one.

A physical player without being nasty or illegal...loved Mase as well.

I am not too sure about Mase in this league. He was a ball dominant iso heavy player. He could be tricky. You kinda gotta get out of his way and let him have at it.

I loved Mase in NYC and Charlotte but I am still angry at how things played out when he went to Milwaukee. I thought they were on the verge of a Championship. Mase should have been the final piece but his selfishness destroyed that team from within.

While I agree Mason was a bit of a cancer in that locker room, I never bought Milwaukee as being anywhere near a contender. Milwaukee made the ECFs the year before Mason got there but that ECF had possibly the 2 worst ECF teams ever to be in the ECFs at the same time.

The real title contenders were all out West. The real title contenders during this period were the Lakers, Spurs, Suns and Kings. Milwaukee was no where near title contenders.

And though Mason loved to pound the ball in the post, which contributed to a much slower pace and disjointed offense, I think a much worse defense, bad rebounding and terrible play from their bigs, who were pretty suspect even the year before, were bigger factors in that team falling off.

It's also very possible that 2001 team that went to the ECF played way over their heads that year in, again, maybe one of the worst seasons for Eastern Conference basketball ever. They were a .500 team before that season and for a while after that season.

A cursory look at the stats would say that the team's success wasn't really sustainable: they had the best offence in the league with an All-NBA guard spearheading the offence (screams of a really hot year than actual sustainable quality) and the 20th best defence with a good number of sketchy defensive players. That Bucks team looks more like a mid-high 40s to low 50 win team than a contender tbh.

I’m curious how much of that one year peak was the George Karl factor. His teams have a history of playing really hard for him at first, followed by them soon tuning him out. I know that Ray Allen criticized him.

[Somebody]

I loved that dude.  They should just clone Mason and give every team one.

A physical player without being nasty or illegal...loved Mase as well.

I am not too sure about Mase in this league. He was a ball dominant iso heavy player. He could be tricky. You kinda gotta get out of his way and let him have at it.

I loved Mase in NYC and Charlotte but I am still angry at how things played out when he went to Milwaukee. I thought they were on the verge of a Championship. Mase should have been the final piece but his selfishness destroyed that team from within.

While I agree Mason was a bit of a cancer in that locker room, I never bought Milwaukee as being anywhere near a contender. Milwaukee made the ECFs the year before Mason got there but that ECF had possibly the 2 worst ECF teams ever to be in the ECFs at the same time.

The real title contenders were all out West. The real title contenders during this period were the Lakers, Spurs, Suns and Kings. Milwaukee was no where near title contenders.

And though Mason loved to pound the ball in the post, which contributed to a much slower pace and disjointed offense, I think a much worse defense, bad rebounding and terrible play from their bigs, who were pretty suspect even the year before, were bigger factors in that team falling off.

It's also very possible that 2001 team that went to the ECF played way over their heads that year in, again, maybe one of the worst seasons for Eastern Conference basketball ever. They were a .500 team before that season and for a while after that season.

A cursory look at the stats would say that the team's success wasn't really sustainable: they had the best offence in the league with an All-NBA guard spearheading the offence (screams of a really hot year than actual sustainable quality) and the 20th best defence with a good number of sketchy defensive players. That Bucks team looks more like a mid-high 40s to low 50 win team than a contender tbh.

I’m curious how much of that one year peak was the George Karl factor. His teams have a history of playing really hard for him at first, followed by them soon tuning him out. I know that Ray Allen criticized him.

I think it was pretty much Ray going supernova for that one year. His APM stats peaked in '01 (it was so high for his standards that there's a clear distance between his '01 season and his second "best" season in this metric), and his box stats do show that his efficiency and scoring volume were at its best (or near it) when compared to other seasons in his career. The tape also shows that he was really dynamic that season when it came to the offensive end for guys who want a bit more than numbers.

[Roy H.]

I loved that dude.  They should just clone Mason and give every team one.

A physical player without being nasty or illegal...loved Mase as well.

I am not too sure about Mase in this league. He was a ball dominant iso heavy player. He could be tricky. You kinda gotta get out of his way and let him have at it.

I loved Mase in NYC and Charlotte but I am still angry at how things played out when he went to Milwaukee. I thought they were on the verge of a Championship. Mase should have been the final piece but his selfishness destroyed that team from within.

While I agree Mason was a bit of a cancer in that locker room, I never bought Milwaukee as being anywhere near a contender. Milwaukee made the ECFs the year before Mason got there but that ECF had possibly the 2 worst ECF teams ever to be in the ECFs at the same time.

The real title contenders were all out West. The real title contenders during this period were the Lakers, Spurs, Suns and Kings. Milwaukee was no where near title contenders.

And though Mason loved to pound the ball in the post, which contributed to a much slower pace and disjointed offense, I think a much worse defense, bad rebounding and terrible play from their bigs, who were pretty suspect even the year before, were bigger factors in that team falling off.

It's also very possible that 2001 team that went to the ECF played way over their heads that year in, again, maybe one of the worst seasons for Eastern Conference basketball ever. They were a .500 team before that season and for a while after that season.

A cursory look at the stats would say that the team's success wasn't really sustainable: they had the best offence in the league with an All-NBA guard spearheading the offence (screams of a really hot year than actual sustainable quality) and the 20th best defence with a good number of sketchy defensive players. That Bucks team looks more like a mid-high 40s to low 50 win team than a contender tbh.

I’m curious how much of that one year peak was the George Karl factor. His teams have a history of playing really hard for him at first, followed by them soon tuning him out. I know that Ray Allen criticized him.

I think it was pretty much Ray going supernova for that one year. His APM stats peaked in '01 (it was so high for his standards that there's a clear distance between his '01 season and his second "best" season in this metric), and his box stats do show that his efficiency and scoring volume were at its best (or near it) when compared to other seasons in his career. The tape also shows that he was really dynamic that season when it came to the offensive end for guys who want a bit more than numbers.

I think that you are seeing some thing in the stats that isn’t there. He had 0.5 assists more per 100 possessions than he did in 2002. Meanwhile, in 2001 he was an inferior shooter and scorer on a per possession basis.

Adjusted Plus-minus, RPM, win shares, etc., aren’t nearly as good at predicting the quality of a player’s season than stat heads would have you believe.  They’re just fluky, often backward-looking metrics created to try to describe impact, which isn’t at all measurable consistently.

[nickagneta]

I loved that dude.  They should just clone Mason and give every team one.

A physical player without being nasty or illegal...loved Mase as well.

I am not too sure about Mase in this league. He was a ball dominant iso heavy player. He could be tricky. You kinda gotta get out of his way and let him have at it.

I loved Mase in NYC and Charlotte but I am still angry at how things played out when he went to Milwaukee. I thought they were on the verge of a Championship. Mase should have been the final piece but his selfishness destroyed that team from within.

While I agree Mason was a bit of a cancer in that locker room, I never bought Milwaukee as being anywhere near a contender. Milwaukee made the ECFs the year before Mason got there but that ECF had possibly the 2 worst ECF teams ever to be in the ECFs at the same time.

The real title contenders were all out West. The real title contenders during this period were the Lakers, Spurs, Suns and Kings. Milwaukee was no where near title contenders.

And though Mason loved to pound the ball in the post, which contributed to a much slower pace and disjointed offense, I think a much worse defense, bad rebounding and terrible play from their bigs, who were pretty suspect even the year before, were bigger factors in that team falling off.

It's also very possible that 2001 team that went to the ECF played way over their heads that year in, again, maybe one of the worst seasons for Eastern Conference basketball ever. They were a .500 team before that season and for a while after that season.

A cursory look at the stats would say that the team's success wasn't really sustainable: they had the best offence in the league with an All-NBA guard spearheading the offence (screams of a really hot year than actual sustainable quality) and the 20th best defence with a good number of sketchy defensive players. That Bucks team looks more like a mid-high 40s to low 50 win team than a contender tbh.

I’m curious how much of that one year peak was the George Karl factor. His teams have a history of playing really hard for him at first, followed by them soon tuning him out. I know that Ray Allen criticized him.

I think it was pretty much Ray going supernova for that one year. His APM stats peaked in '01 (it was so high for his standards that there's a clear distance between his '01 season and his second "best" season in this metric), and his box stats do show that his efficiency and scoring volume were at its best (or near it) when compared to other seasons in his career. The tape also shows that he was really dynamic that season when it came to the offensive end for guys who want a bit more than numbers.

I think that you are seeing some thing in the stats that isn’t there. He had 0.5 assists more per 100 possessions than he did in 2002. Meanwhile, in 2001 he was an inferior shooter and scorer on a per possession basis.

Adjusted Plus-minus, RPM, win shares, etc., aren’t nearly as good at predicting the quality of a player’s season than stat heads would have you believe.  They’re just fluky, often backward-looking metrics created to try to describe impact, which isn’t at all measurable consistently.

Agree 100%. The human factor played a much larger factor that year than anything else. Bringing in a malcontent in Mason combined with the core of that team being in the third season with George Karl's caustic personality and drill sargeant coaching style is what killed that team. That and because their bigs were bad.

20 years from now the 20somethings of the world can go back and look at stats and say that Kyrie had an amazing season in 2018-19 and the stats show this, this and that. They may then use the stats to form ideas about why, basketball wise the Celtics failed  that year.

But the reason they failed was poor roster construction, Hayward's limitations in coming back from injury and Kyrie, Rozier and, to an extent, Morris being locker room cancers/problems. It was the human element that caused the Celtics to have a bit of a down season, not what the stats would say was the problem.

[Somebody]

I loved that dude.  They should just clone Mason and give every team one.

A physical player without being nasty or illegal...loved Mase as well.

I am not too sure about Mase in this league. He was a ball dominant iso heavy player. He could be tricky. You kinda gotta get out of his way and let him have at it.

I loved Mase in NYC and Charlotte but I am still angry at how things played out when he went to Milwaukee. I thought they were on the verge of a Championship. Mase should have been the final piece but his selfishness destroyed that team from within.

While I agree Mason was a bit of a cancer in that locker room, I never bought Milwaukee as being anywhere near a contender. Milwaukee made the ECFs the year before Mason got there but that ECF had possibly the 2 worst ECF teams ever to be in the ECFs at the same time.

The real title contenders were all out West. The real title contenders during this period were the Lakers, Spurs, Suns and Kings. Milwaukee was no where near title contenders.

And though Mason loved to pound the ball in the post, which contributed to a much slower pace and disjointed offense, I think a much worse defense, bad rebounding and terrible play from their bigs, who were pretty suspect even the year before, were bigger factors in that team falling off.

It's also very possible that 2001 team that went to the ECF played way over their heads that year in, again, maybe one of the worst seasons for Eastern Conference basketball ever. They were a .500 team before that season and for a while after that season.

A cursory look at the stats would say that the team's success wasn't really sustainable: they had the best offence in the league with an All-NBA guard spearheading the offence (screams of a really hot year than actual sustainable quality) and the 20th best defence with a good number of sketchy defensive players. That Bucks team looks more like a mid-high 40s to low 50 win team than a contender tbh.

I’m curious how much of that one year peak was the George Karl factor. His teams have a history of playing really hard for him at first, followed by them soon tuning him out. I know that Ray Allen criticized him.

I think it was pretty much Ray going supernova for that one year. His APM stats peaked in '01 (it was so high for his standards that there's a clear distance between his '01 season and his second "best" season in this metric), and his box stats do show that his efficiency and scoring volume were at its best (or near it) when compared to other seasons in his career. The tape also shows that he was really dynamic that season when it came to the offensive end for guys who want a bit more than numbers.

I think that you are seeing some thing in the stats that isn’t there. He had 0.5 assists more per 100 possessions than he did in 2002. Meanwhile, in 2001 he was an inferior shooter and scorer on a per possession basis.

I'm not, his APM number in '01 was nuts considering his results in other prime years as an offensive centrepiece. And perhaps only as a 3 point shooter, his two point shooting and FT rate was considerably better in '01, leading to a +9.2% rTS instead of a +7.8% rTS in '02. Ray also upped his usage rate in '02, which should lead to more scoring per possession (usage rate isn't perfect at measuring offensive load, but it's alright for a guy who's not a heavy playmaker like Ray).

[Somebody]

I loved that dude.  They should just clone Mason and give every team one.

A physical player without being nasty or illegal...loved Mase as well.

I am not too sure about Mase in this league. He was a ball dominant iso heavy player. He could be tricky. You kinda gotta get out of his way and let him have at it.

I loved Mase in NYC and Charlotte but I am still angry at how things played out when he went to Milwaukee. I thought they were on the verge of a Championship. Mase should have been the final piece but his selfishness destroyed that team from within.

While I agree Mason was a bit of a cancer in that locker room, I never bought Milwaukee as being anywhere near a contender. Milwaukee made the ECFs the year before Mason got there but that ECF had possibly the 2 worst ECF teams ever to be in the ECFs at the same time.

The real title contenders were all out West. The real title contenders during this period were the Lakers, Spurs, Suns and Kings. Milwaukee was no where near title contenders.

And though Mason loved to pound the ball in the post, which contributed to a much slower pace and disjointed offense, I think a much worse defense, bad rebounding and terrible play from their bigs, who were pretty suspect even the year before, were bigger factors in that team falling off.

It's also very possible that 2001 team that went to the ECF played way over their heads that year in, again, maybe one of the worst seasons for Eastern Conference basketball ever. They were a .500 team before that season and for a while after that season.

A cursory look at the stats would say that the team's success wasn't really sustainable: they had the best offence in the league with an All-NBA guard spearheading the offence (screams of a really hot year than actual sustainable quality) and the 20th best defence with a good number of sketchy defensive players. That Bucks team looks more like a mid-high 40s to low 50 win team than a contender tbh.

I’m curious how much of that one year peak was the George Karl factor. His teams have a history of playing really hard for him at first, followed by them soon tuning him out. I know that Ray Allen criticized him.

I think it was pretty much Ray going supernova for that one year. His APM stats peaked in '01 (it was so high for his standards that there's a clear distance between his '01 season and his second "best" season in this metric), and his box stats do show that his efficiency and scoring volume were at its best (or near it) when compared to other seasons in his career. The tape also shows that he was really dynamic that season when it came to the offensive end for guys who want a bit more than numbers.

I think that you are seeing some thing in the stats that isn’t there. He had 0.5 assists more per 100 possessions than he did in 2002. Meanwhile, in 2001 he was an inferior shooter and scorer on a per possession basis.

Adjusted Plus-minus, RPM, win shares, etc., aren’t nearly as good at predicting the quality of a player’s season than stat heads would have you believe.  They’re just fluky, often backward-looking metrics created to try to describe impact, which isn’t at all measurable consistently.

Agree 100%. The human factor played a much larger factor that year than anything else. Bringing in a malcontent in Mason combined with the core of that team being in the third season with George Karl's caustic personality and drill sargeant coaching style is what killed that team. That and because their bigs were bad.

20 years from now the 20somethings of the world can go back and look at stats and say that Kyrie had an amazing season in 2018-19 and the stats show this, this and that. They may then use the stats to form ideas about why, basketball wise the Celtics failed  that year.

But the reason they failed was poor roster construction, Hayward's limitations in coming back from injury and Kyrie, Rozier and, to an extent, Morris being locker room cancers/problems. It was the human element that caused the Celtics to have a bit of a down season, not what the stats would say was the problem.

Except the bolded was simply untrue unless you're looking at the classic slash line for your daily dose of stats. The stats show that he was a borderline top 15 player who wasn't good enough to carry a team to title glory, and the human element didn't help matters.

[nickagneta]

Round 11 is now open.

[gouki88]

Keen to see what binkies are taken these two rounds!

[RPGenerate]

So I'm a bit stumped on who I'm gonna pick, so this might take some time.

[Jvalin]

So I'm a bit stumped on who I'm gonna pick, so this might take some time.

I'm between 4 guys and I have the 4th pick of the day. I hope you guys will select the 3 of them, cause otherwise I can't decide whom to draft.

[nickagneta]

So I'm a bit stumped on who I'm gonna pick, so this might take some time.

Just get it in before 10:30.😄

[RPGenerate]

At this point, I need some great role players. This guy is the definition of a champion, a 3-and-D guy who has been on great teams his whole career... and Timmy D could use some company. With the first pick of the 11th round, the Denver Nuggets select...



Danny Green!!!

[gouki88]

Two really strong 3&D guards off the bench for RPG now

[RPGenerate]

Two really strong 3&D guards off the bench for RPG now

Yep. And just flatout good teammates. Guys that can have a positive effect without playing much.