Some very strange selections in the first round.
Such as?
KG at 2 is too high. I mean the rationale was basically he would be even better today, yet someone like Durant, who I think the thought is what KG would be today goes 7 (too low). Remember if KG is a perimeter player today he isn't anywhere near the rebounder, he won't be the same level of interior defender, etc. You can't just assume he adds the great perimeter skills while not losing the interior ones. He probably looks like either Giannis or Durant in the modern game, not a combination of all the best skills of those guys. Leonard was too high. A poor passer that can't stay healthy and doesn't dominate the way someone like Shaq did (so you can get away with missing a bunch of games). Pierce isn't a top 14 player in the 20 year period and neither are Chris Paul or McGrady (though they are more defendable than Pierce). Curry in the top 5 is way too high. We've seen what physical defenders do to him in the Finals (sans Durant to bail him out). Incredible shooter, but small and a poor defender. He is a 1st round pick sure, but no where near as high as he went in this thing (Durant is a way better all around player for example). People seem to be overthinking this a lot. Just take the best player and worry about team building later on.
Think I disagree with almost all of this
That is fair. Can always disagree, but I firmly maintain that KG at 2 is just wrong. Lebron and Shaq are BY FAR the top two players in this. Duncan consistently outperformed Garnett throughout their careers. It wasn't just about teammates either, Duncan was just a flat out better player than Garnett. KG was a great player, but he was at best the 4th best player in this thing. You can't take him at 2. Worst pick in the entire draft given who was on the board when the selection was made.
Curry is a great player, but selecting him makes the rest of the draft far more difficult as the entire team has to be crafted around his skill set. I just think when you set yourself up to take fit, rather than talent later on, you are setting yourself up for failure, especially when players like Durant are still on the board (and to a lesser extent Kobe, Kawhi, Giannis, and Dirk), it makes Curry a bad selection given who was still on the board. Curry is better, though pretty similar to another 2 time MVP PG that is still available.
My top 5 would have been LBJ, Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Durant. I'd probably have Kobe, Dirk, Giannis, and Kawhi as the next 4, though I haven't given it a ton of thought. Curry would likely round out my top 10, but really after the top 5 I didn't actually put much thought into the actual order, just more or less general tiers and I haven't picked through seasons of players either to come up with an actual ranking either past that point. I do think there are several players available though that I'd have selected ahead of players that were actually drafted, Pierce being the one that stands out the most. Pierce is just not a top 14 pick in this thing.
You may want to give this some consideration before coming in here all guns blazing.
You forgot to highlight some key language i.e. "past that point" and "general tiers". If you want to argue about the order of Kobe, Dirk, Giannis, and Kawhi that is fine, but I do think they should all be ahead of Curry and I put my top 5 in order. All of my comments were based on that.
I didn't forget to highlight anything. Just acknowledging that you haven't put consideration into seasons yet.
You didn't read the highlighted text very well then. I said past that point. And I know Curry's best season, and Leonard's, etc. I was really meaning players that hadn't been drafted yet to see if an individual season from a random player here or there would eclipse a drafted players. Pierce, for example, I know of several players and their seasons that are better than Pierce's best season. Pierce was a huge reach, especially as he wasn't even 14th. That said Garnett going ahead of Shaq and Curry going ahead of Durant are far worse picks in my mind. The value is just too much.
Curry was the much more potent offensive force than Dirk ever was, and I have him on the same tier of offensive weapon as Durant, and their defence in their prime is all about the same. You say Curry is a poor defender, but that's simply not really correct. I had that same impression for a while until I watched him more closely and dug deep into the stats on his defence.
In 2015-16 Curry made 200 contested 3's off the dribble, at a 42.5% clip. That was more than 26 teams that season. He was also the league leader in points off pick and rolls, points off screens, secondary assists, while putting up the best PER by a guard since Michael Jordan in 1991. Further, he improved his player efficiency rating by more than any reigning MVP in history. In 1984-85, Larry Bird increased his PER by 2.3 points, the highest increase at the time for a reigning MVP. Curry's improvement: 3.5. He made 38 less 3's in the 2015-2016 season than the entire Bucks squad.
I think you're seriously underselling how jaw-dropping an offensive weapon Curry was in that season, but to each their own.
Topic: 2020 Historical Draft Thread: Draft over. Playoffs coming soon! (Read 270063 times)