I think my lack of firepower off the bench made the difference from getting closer to the top spot. But, I still am happy I made that trade up to get Ray Allen, he was the guy that felt so perfect in that lineup. No picks for 2 rounds was brutal though.
Some of the late guys I would have liked for your bench - Rose, Redd, LMA or Sheed. Loved the Hayward pick. Liked the Bogut one as well. Just thought FVV/OG/Ibaka were more third string guys.
He went for efficient and versatile 2-way players with OG and Ibaka. I think OG and Ibaka were good mid to late picks as backups if you can mix them in with a potent starting lineup where all 5 guys can score at all 3 levels and do nearly anything on the court
I think there are star level role players in a league like this and the next tier of role players like Ibaka belong on the third string.
Look at some of the bench bigs in this league. Big Ben, Sheed, LMA, KAT, Brand... They either bring elite one way play or superior two way play... Ditto with the guards.
It's hard to get away with solid. You need guys that can fill a role AND raise the level of the team.
I view it differently.
Take KAT, for example. He's a stats darling. But, in a league like this, I don't see him as being all that impactful. He's a soft player on both ends. The only thing he can be counted on for is three point sniping.
Meanwhile, Ibaka was all-defense and top-5 in DPOY voting for three straight seasons, and added 15/9 with a credible outside shot and good efficiency. And, unlike KAT, he's been to the NBA Finals (twice, including a ring with Toronto).
To me, I'd take Ibaka.
==========================================================
Another thing I've noticed in some of the voting justifications: the idea that a defense has to be perfect, or can have no weaknesses. First, that's silly: all defenses will have some vulnerabilities.
But, more importantly: it's not a flaw if a guy give up 20 ppg to his opponent, but scores 30 ppg. And, it's not a feature if a guy scores 25 ppg, but gives up 30 ppg.
Using my team as an example: Steph Curry isn't an elite-level defender. (He's a good one, though, or was in his prime.) He's going to give up points. But, in terms of points scored and points created, he's a top-5 impact player in this (or any other) league. To downvote Boston because Steph Curry is somehow a negative to the defense... Well, that doesn't make any sense at all, because the value he brings is higher than any other PG out there.
But, the biggest thing is consistency. Some teams are downgraded because they have "weak" defenders, whereas others are given a pass. New York is going to finish in the top-3, despite having one terrible, league-worst type defender (Steve Nash), and one Hedo-level defender (Ginobili). It seems like the standards voters applied are a tad bit arbitrary.