Official Discuss your CB Draft team

[Fafnir]

But history shows that very few rookies become real difference making players their first years and that some years, none do that first year.

I'd be shocked (but interested) to be pointed in the direction of a draft that produced zero impact rookies. Safe to say, we'll have at least half a dozen NBA starters out of the gates. That's been the modern trend. And even more rotation players. Even if we limit the list to 2010 playoff teams, we're still left to talk about, Jennings, Harden, Lawson, Matthews, Ibaka and Taj Gibson.

2006 the draft yielded one impact rookie, Brandon Roy. The rest of the players, their rookie years were players you would not want as a player in the top 9 of your rotation.

2002 Yao and Amare were like the only 2 players you would have wanted in a regular rotation as a rookie.

2000 Mike Miller won the Rookie of the Year award and was at best, good enough to be a 6th or 7th player on a good team.

Maybe I went overboard saying none, but the amount of drafts that produce certifiably several NBA starting players or rotational players is about one in three or so. Most produce a couple to three maybe four that first year.

So, in an exercise like this I agree with wdleehi. It's good to have them if you are going to have a "Future" team or if like last year with the Crotornats, you are going to have them as end of the bench filler to ween into the game, but otherwise, if you are using them as rotational players on a team that you believe is contending now, I'm holding that against your team and writing in their contributions as non significant.

In the 2007-2008 season Glen Davis averaged 8.1 minutes per contest in the post season and the Celtics won a title. While he didn't swing any games it doesn't seem like he hurt them much either. How do you see that kind of production in this kind of league? Could a player like Glen Davis come in and play 7-10 minutes a night for a champion?

Keep in mind that Glen Davis also got 9 DNP-CDs during that playoff run.  In other words, he wasn't playing 8 minutes per contest, he was playing 8 minutes per game that Doc felt comfortable playing him in / was forced to play him in.  Several of the games he saw big minutes in were blowouts.

If somebody is relying upon the rookie equivalent of BBD to be a key player in their playoff rotation, I think it would be a mistake.

Didn't Powe play in the games that BBD didn't though? (Powe and him were always fighting for the fourth big man slot)

I seem to remember one of the two getting minutes most playoff games.

[nickagneta]

2006 the draft yielded one impact rookie, Brandon Roy. The rest of the players, their rookie years were players you would not want as a player in the top 9 of your rotation.

What if you're other option at point guard was Sebastian Telfair...

Roy was the only hands down starter but you wouldn't have included, Bargnani, Aldridge, Gay, Foye, Milsap Garbajosa, etc. in your top nine rotation?

During the 2006-2007 season the NBA Champion Spurs 9th man Fabricio Oberto, appeared in 79 games, started 33, and averaged 4.4 points, 4.7 rebounds, 0.3 blocks, and 17.3 minutes.

Struggling rookie Tyrus Thomas appeared in 72 games, started 4, averaged 5.2 points, 3.7 rebounds, 1.1 blocks and 13.4 minutes.

The average NBA player in 2007 averaged 8.2 points on 46% shooting, 20.6 minutes, 3.5 rebounds, and 1.8 assists.

WW I think you prove my point.

Those players you mentioned were all extremely flawed players their rookie years with problems ranging from inefficient scoring, horrible defending, poor rebounding, turnover prone and just all around soft play. Just because a rookie can throw some numbers up doesn't mean they have what it takes give a positive contribution to a good team their rookie year.

And Ty Thomas was a mess in Chicago that first year with severe maturity problems and a tough time taking proper coaching. Do you really believe Pop would have let Thomas play for that championship team? Just because the numbers are close does not mean they translate.

[nickagneta]

But history shows that very few rookies become real difference making players their first years and that some years, none do that first year.

I'd be shocked (but interested) to be pointed in the direction of a draft that produced zero impact rookies. Safe to say, we'll have at least half a dozen NBA starters out of the gates. That's been the modern trend. And even more rotation players. Even if we limit the list to 2010 playoff teams, we're still left to talk about, Jennings, Harden, Lawson, Matthews, Ibaka and Taj Gibson.

2006 the draft yielded one impact rookie, Brandon Roy. The rest of the players, their rookie years were players you would not want as a player in the top 9 of your rotation.

2002 Yao and Amare were like the only 2 players you would have wanted in a regular rotation as a rookie.

2000 Mike Miller won the Rookie of the Year award and was at best, good enough to be a 6th or 7th player on a good team.

Maybe I went overboard saying none, but the amount of drafts that produce certifiably several NBA starting players or rotational players is about one in three or so. Most produce a couple to three maybe four that first year.

So, in an exercise like this I agree with wdleehi. It's good to have them if you are going to have a "Future" team or if like last year with the Crotornats, you are going to have them as end of the bench filler to ween into the game, but otherwise, if you are using them as rotational players on a team that you believe is contending now, I'm holding that against your team and writing in their contributions as non significant.

In the 2007-2008 season Glen Davis averaged 8.1 minutes per contest in the post season and the Celtics won a title. While he didn't swing any games it doesn't seem like he hurt them much either. How do you see that kind of production in this kind of league? Could a player like Glen Davis come in and play 7-10 minutes a night for a champion?

Keep in mind that Glen Davis also got 9 DNP-CDs during that playoff run.  In other words, he wasn't playing 8 minutes per contest, he was playing 8 minutes per game that Doc felt comfortable playing him in / was forced to play him in.  Several of the games he saw big minutes in were blowouts.

If somebody is relying upon the rookie equivalent of BBD to be a key player in their playoff rotation, I think it would be a mistake.

Didn't Powe play in the games that BBD didn't though? (Powe and him were always fighting for the fourth big man slot)

I seem to remember one of the two getting minutes most playoff games.

Wasn't Powe a second year player and not a rookie. I don't see what his getting minutes has to do with rookies when he wasn't a rookie. Unproven, yes. A rookie, no.

[Fafnir]

Didn't Powe play in the games that BBD didn't though? (Powe and him were always fighting for the fourth big man slot)

I seem to remember one of the two getting minutes most playoff games.

Wasn't Powe a second year player and not a rookie. I don't see what his getting minutes has to do with rookies when he wasn't a rookie. Unproven, yes. A rookie, no.

Just talking through the situation. Power and BBD can legitimately be said to be 4A and 4B on the big man depth chart that season.

Though at times they were 5A and 5B and Posey got to play the 4.

[The Walker Wiggle]

2006 the draft yielded one impact rookie, Brandon Roy. The rest of the players, their rookie years were players you would not want as a player in the top 9 of your rotation.

What if you're other option at point guard was Sebastian Telfair...

Roy was the only hands down starter but you wouldn't have included, Bargnani, Aldridge, Gay, Foye, Milsap Garbajosa, etc. in your top nine rotation?

During the 2006-2007 season the NBA Champion Spurs 9th man Fabricio Oberto, appeared in 79 games, started 33, and averaged 4.4 points, 4.7 rebounds, 0.3 blocks, and 17.3 minutes.

Struggling rookie Tyrus Thomas appeared in 72 games, started 4, averaged 5.2 points, 3.7 rebounds, 1.1 blocks and 13.4 minutes.

The average NBA player in 2007 averaged 8.2 points on 46% shooting, 20.6 minutes, 3.5 rebounds, and 1.8 assists.

WW I think you prove my point.

Those players you mentioned were all extremely flawed players their rookie years with problems ranging from inefficient scoring, horrible defending, poor rebounding, turnover prone and just all around soft play. Just because a rookie can throw some numbers up doesn't mean they have what it takes give a positive contribution to a good team their rookie year.

And Ty Thomas was a mess in Chicago that first year with severe maturity problems and a tough time taking proper coaching. Do you really believe Pop would have let Thomas play for that championship team? Just because the numbers are close does not mean they translate.

Except that I think you prove my point. (Ha ha.) Flawed might also describe the following rotation players from the 2007 Finals:

Larry Hughes, Brent Barry, Francisco Elson, Sasha Pavlovic, Damon Jones, and rookie Daniel Gibson?

Which isn't to compare the basketball IQs of Oberto and Thomas. But at the end of the day CB Draft is an imaginative exercise. And a broad dismal of rookies shows a lack of.

When was the last time a starting rookie had a prominent role on a contending team?

And isn't this question less relevant in a straight re-draft league? (As opposed to the actual NBA where a losing record is typically required of lottery teams.) But I do have two more answers: rookie Richard Jefferson was fifth in minutes played on a Nets team that went to the Finals. And he often matched up against Manu Ginobili, the Spurs' seasoned 24 year old rookie.

All that said, it's hard not to seem rather self-serving in my arguments given that the Bucs have DeMarcus Cousins as their starting center and 4th/5th man. Or maybe that's proof that my sentiment is genuine?  

[indeedproceed]

And isn't this question less relevant in a straight re-draft league? (As opposed to the actual NBA where a losing record is typically required of lottery teams.) But I do have two more answers - rookie Richard Jefferson was fifth in minutes played on a Nets team that went to the Finals. And he often matched up against Manu Ginobili, the Spurs' J.R. Giddens-aged 24 year old rookie.

So Richard Jefferson. Although, Jefferson didn't start, and he played against the Lakers.

Edit: I just went back and checked some box scores.

So Richard Jefferson his rookie year went to the finals, as a non-starter who averaged 22mpg.

Then, his 2nd year he played a lot.

The same year (Jefferson's second), Ginobli at age 24 played around 27 MPG off the bench for the Champion Spurs.

[indeedproceed]

Still begs the question...when did a rookie start for a contending team? When did he last start for a finals team? Tim Duncan?

EDIT: Nope, Duncan's rookie year he lost in the 2nd round. They were contenders, but didn't get past Malone and the Jazz.

[The Walker Wiggle]

So Richard Jefferson. Although, Jefferson didn't start, and he played against the Lakers.

Ah, really? Oh well, I guess I shouldn't be watching Breaking Bad on my laptop while "winning arguments." (Was Nets/Spurs the following year?) Still not as embarrassing as the time Roy ruined an anti-Lebron screed of mine by pointing out that James had in fact gone to the Finals in 2007.

Point still stands that the question is far less relevant in a parity heavy re-drafted CNBA.

[The Walker Wiggle]

Still begs the question...when did a rookie start for a contending team? When did he last start for a finals team? Tim Duncan?

EDIT: Nope, Duncan's rookie year he lost in the 2nd round. They were contenders, but didn't get past Malone and the Jazz.

Well, if you'll only accept a rookie starter that won an NBA championship. My gut tells me, L*ker, Magic Johnson was the last to do it. (Thanks for bringing that up.)

But you don't have to reach very far back for Courtney Lee - who I believe started in the 2009 Finals. (Again, if it's not already clear, little to no fact checking involved...)

Did I win the No-Prize?

[indeedproceed]

No no, Courtney Lee is a hit. You sunk my battleship.

But it does feed my theory. The best rookies on win now teams are role players that spent 3-4 years in college.

[The Walker Wiggle]

No no, Courtney Lee is a hit. You sunk my battleship.

But it does feed my theory. The best rookies on win now teams are role players that spent 3-4 years in college.

Whereas I'd argue talent wins out. The Magic were never in a position to draft Eric Gordon or O.J. Mayo.

[StartOrien]

No no, Courtney Lee is a hit. You sunk my battleship.

But it does feed my theory. The best rookies on win now teams are role players that spent 3-4 years in college.

But is that the case, or is that the win-now teams are never in position to draft the top talent? I'm a big fan of Courtney Lee, but wouldn't the Magic have been better suited for their championship run if they had been able to land OJ Mayo (who only played 1 year of college ball)?

[Roy H.]

I don't think the argument is that rookies can't, under any circumstances, play big roles on contenders.  At least, that shouldn't be the argument, in my opinion.

Rather, in a draft like this, I'd say it's almost impossible to predict what players could play a role.  Tons of rookies -- even lottery picks -- look lost their first year, and often hurt their teams more than they help.  They're essentially getting on the job training, that doesn't necessarily fit in with being a contender. 

When I'm assessing a "win now" team, it's hard to peg a rookie's value.  Usually with rookies, the downside is as realistic -- or moreso -- than the upside. 

Since they're the subject of today's debate, I like both Greg Monroe and Ed Davis, especially Monroe.  I think both will turn out to be good players in the NBA.  However, if I had to assess their chances of both being championship team rotation caliber players right now, I'd say the chances for each individually was below 50%, and the chances of both being of that caliber in their rookies season would be below 25%.

[StartOrien]

It's a pretty cool debate, definitely part of the fun of the Celticsblog Draft excercise.

[nickagneta]

I don't think the argument is that rookies can't, under any circumstances, play big roles on contenders.  At least, that shouldn't be the argument, in my opinion.

Rather, in a draft like this, I'd say it's almost impossible to predict what players could play a role.  Tons of rookies -- even lottery picks -- look lost their first year, and often hurt their teams more than they help.  They're essentially getting on the job training, that doesn't necessarily fit in with being a contender. 

When I'm assessing a "win now" team, it's hard to peg a rookie's value.  Usually with rookies, the downside is as realistic -- or moreso -- than the upside. 

Since they're the subject of today's debate, I like both Greg Monroe and Ed Davis, especially Monroe.  I think both will turn out to be good players in the NBA.  However, if I had to assess their chances of both being championship team rotation caliber players right now, I'd say the chances for each individually was below 50%, and the chances of both being of that caliber in their rookies season would be below 25%.

TP Roy and kind of the point I am getting across. And honestly, my numerical percentages would probably be even lower than that.

I think a player in the top 7 players or so has about a 40% chance of being a player that will contribute to their team more than hinder their team in winning that very first year. From player 8 to player say 20 or so I believe that number dips drastically to about 15%. Players chosen thereafter, the chances of them being a meaningfully contributing rotational player their very first year is below 5%.

And because I believe in my heart that these numbers are realistic and true, I heavily discount teams that are going to have rookies play prominent roles in their rotations in this game.

So for that reason teams like say, New York who has Paul George featured so prominently or Philly with 4 rookies or Chicago with 3 rookies and a second year player with minimal playing time, Utah with Wesley Johnson and Phoenix with their three rooks, should be discounted, in my opinion from true contendership for the championship because the chances of them being meaningful are small and you might not get anything whatsoever from those players.

And if this turns out to be one of those years that come along once every 4 years or so where the class as a whole just kind of sucks and there's really only 1 or two players that do anything their rookie year, then how are we to determine who those players are.

Now, I don't mean to pick on IP's team but I have already my opinion clear about Lebron's surrounding cast. But what if this is one of those years where the rookie class just lays an egg? It happens 20-25% of the time. What if IP's three rookies are bad and Eric Maynor struggles? This is not completely out of the realm of possibilities. This is not something that has only a minuscule chance of happening. In his case he then basically has no backup for Noah or LeBron. Pretty tough to be considered a contender if your depth is 7 players and only one of them is a star.