2011 CB Historical Draft - Draft Thread

[KCattheStripe]

With pick 4.11, Redz selects one of the most underrated players of all-time, PF/C Nate Thurmond. 

He's one of the best defensive and rebounding big men of all-time, and he could score, too.

I really thought he was going to slip a while longer.

[nickagneta]

edit

[nickagneta]

I like the Pierce pick just not the year. Here is where I don't like Roy's thoughts on evaluating a player outside of that year. The year in question Pierce was an immature party person and was not the consummate team player or defender he would become. His Indiana playoff fiasco years later shows what I mean. 2007-08 Pierce, though he had worse stats, is a more mature and better all around player.

But then again your main evidence of how immature he was came years later.

I'm sorry Faf, in you experience do people go from being very mature to completely immature to very mature again years later?

Stop being a contrarian just for the sake of being a contrarian. That's a pretty ridiculous way of looking at things.

[StartOrien]

See start that wasn't so hard.

Edgar isn't going to be happy as my string of MVP's will end with this pick.

SG - Paul Pierce (01/02 season)

Clear no-brainer for me at this point.  Getting huge size at SG in a year when Pierce shot over 6 three's a game and hit over 40% of them, scored over 26 a game, and still had solid rebounding and passing numbers all as a SG (also played some time at SF giving my team a lot of roster flexibility).  He was also an excellent defender that season with a DRTG below 100 and was actually 4th in the league in defensive win shares at 5.6 (along with 7.3 OWS for a total of 12.9 good for 5th in the league).

Sweet! He was on my radar for a bit.

MORANIS


He was theeason why I dont like KGs and Ray Allens Pick

The reason the Cs became champions was the Capitan and the Capitan only, our MVP


GRRRRRRRRRRRREAT PICK!!!
Youre on fire




PLUS

Pierce pick was better next to Kobe than Ray
and that was my ONE proble with Rays pick

PS This is a Naruto Spoiler so if you watch the series please dont watch the image

ALL THESE YEARS OF WATCHING NARUTO FOR YOU TO RUIN IT FOR ME?!?!?!?!?!

HE WAS A FIRE ROBOT THE WHOLE TIME?!!? I KNEW IT!

[indeedproceed]

edit

Thank you. I check this thread on my old 'kinda' smart phone, and I would've had to scroll down through all that. It would've taken a solid 2 mins.

[GreenFaith1819]

With pick 4.11, Redz selects one of the most underrated players of all-time, PF/C Nate Thurmond. 

He's one of the best defensive and rebounding big men of all-time, and he could score, too.

Wow.

He was on my list. Sweet pick!

[Moranis]

I like the Pierce pick just not the year. Here is where I don't like Roy's thoughts on evaluating a player outside of that year. The year in question Pierce was an immature party person and was not the consummate team player or defender he would become. His Indiana playoff fiasco years later shows what I mean. 2007-08 Pierce, though he had worse stats, is a more mature and better all around player.

Pierce was 4th in the league in Defensive Win Shares in 2001-2002.  He had a DRTG below 100, which is excellent.  He led his team to the Eastern Conference Finals.  He was an incredibly efficient scorer for someone scoring 26 ppg (57% TS%).  That is also the year where Pierce led that dramatic 4th quarter comeback against the Nets.  I know NJ ended up winning the series, but game 3 was awesome.  

And none of the negatives you are talking about applies to the 01-02 including the Indiana playoff series which wasn't that year.  

[indeedproceed]

I like the Pierce pick just not the year. Here is where I don't like Roy's thoughts on evaluating a player outside of that year. The year in question Pierce was an immature party person and was not the consummate team player or defender he would become. His Indiana playoff fiasco years later shows what I mean. 2007-08 Pierce, though he had worse stats, is a more mature and better all around player.

Pierce was 4th in the league in Defensive Win Shares in 2001-2002.  He had a DRTG below 100, which is excellent.  He led his team to the Eastern Conference Finals.  He was an incredibly efficient scorer for someone scoring 26 ppg (57% TS%).  That is also the year where Pierce led that dramatic 4th quarter comeback against the Nets.  I know NJ ended up winning the series, but game 3 was awesome. 

And none of the negatives you are talking about applies to the 01-02 including the Indiana playoff series which wasn't that year. 

That's an interesting stance. I think Nick has a valid point with pointing to the person Pierce would become, but your contention basically is 'he held his crap together that year, so he'll hold his crap together with my team, because that's how this single season thing works'.

Yeah, I can see both points, but I think moranis is a nose ahead.

[Roy H.]

With pick 4.11, Redz selects one of the most underrated players of all-time, PF/C Nate Thurmond. 

He's one of the best defensive and rebounding big men of all-time, and he could score, too.

Wow.

He was on my list. Sweet pick!

Thurmond wasn't a guy who immediately jumped to the front of my mind, but after thinking on it, I think it's an inspired pick.

[Moranis]

I like the Pierce pick just not the year. Here is where I don't like Roy's thoughts on evaluating a player outside of that year. The year in question Pierce was an immature party person and was not the consummate team player or defender he would become. His Indiana playoff fiasco years later shows what I mean. 2007-08 Pierce, though he had worse stats, is a more mature and better all around player.

Pierce was 4th in the league in Defensive Win Shares in 2001-2002.  He had a DRTG below 100, which is excellent.  He led his team to the Eastern Conference Finals.  He was an incredibly efficient scorer for someone scoring 26 ppg (57% TS%).  That is also the year where Pierce led that dramatic 4th quarter comeback against the Nets.  I know NJ ended up winning the series, but game 3 was awesome. 

And none of the negatives you are talking about applies to the 01-02 including the Indiana playoff series which wasn't that year. 

That's an interesting stance. I think Nick has a valid point with pointing to the person Pierce would become, but your contention basically is 'he held his crap together that year, so he'll hold his crap together with my team, because that's how this single season thing works'.

Yeah, I can see both points, but I think moranis is a nose ahead.

If you are looking at one season and one season only, that is the only thing you can do.  Nick wants to bring in negatives from future seasons, but doesn't want to bring in the positives, that isn't right.  Either you bring in the future (or the past for that matter) or you don't, but you can't just bring in part of it, you have to bring it all in.

[nickagneta]

I like the Pierce pick just not the year. Here is where I don't like Roy's thoughts on evaluating a player outside of that year. The year in question Pierce was an immature party person and was not the consummate team player or defender he would become. His Indiana playoff fiasco years later shows what I mean. 2007-08 Pierce, though he had worse stats, is a more mature and better all around player.

Pierce was 4th in the league in Defensive Win Shares in 2001-2002.  He had a DRTG below 100, which is excellent.  He led his team to the Eastern Conference Finals.  He was an incredibly efficient scorer for someone scoring 26 ppg (57% TS%).  That is also the year where Pierce led that dramatic 4th quarter comeback against the Nets.  I know NJ ended up winning the series, but game 3 was awesome.  

And none of the negatives you are talking about applies to the 01-02 including the Indiana playoff series which wasn't that year.  

I never said he wasn't a good individual defender but he wasn't nearly the team defender he would become. And Pierce was a pretty immature individual until after all the flak he caught for the Indiana incident. He was a selfish offensive player infected by the selfishness that was Antoine Walker and though he was clutch, he has always been clutch.

I just think that year wasn't his best and shows why it is important to look at players within the year they were selected. Early Pierce and late Pierce are two different players and late Pierce a much better one and more team oriented one.

[Edgar]

I like the Pierce pick just not the year. Here is where I don't like Roy's thoughts on evaluating a player outside of that year. The year in question Pierce was an immature party person and was not the consummate team player or defender he would become. His Indiana playoff fiasco years later shows what I mean. 2007-08 Pierce, though he had worse stats, is a more mature and better all around player.

Pierce was 4th in the league in Defensive Win Shares in 2001-2002.  He had a DRTG below 100, which is excellent.  He led his team to the Eastern Conference Finals.  He was an incredibly efficient scorer for someone scoring 26 ppg (57% TS%).  That is also the year where Pierce led that dramatic 4th quarter comeback against the Nets.  I know NJ ended up winning the series, but game 3 was awesome. 

And none of the negatives you are talking about applies to the 01-02 including the Indiana playoff series which wasn't that year. 

That's an interesting stance. I think Nick has a valid point with pointing to the person Pierce would become, but your contention basically is 'he held his crap together that year, so he'll hold his crap together with my team, because that's how this single season thing works'.

Yeah, I can see both points, but I think moranis is a nose ahead.

If you are looking at one season and one season only, that is the only thing you can do.  Nick wants to bring in negatives from future seasons, but doesn't want to bring in the positives, that isn't right.  Either you bring in the future (or the past for that matter) or you don't, but you can't just bring in part of it, you have to bring it all in.

2008 for me

See After LeBrons HUGE Mistake Moranis only did RIGHTS in this game

Pierce 2008 >> Kobe >> Lebron

all I have to say

[nickagneta]

I like the Pierce pick just not the year. Here is where I don't like Roy's thoughts on evaluating a player outside of that year. The year in question Pierce was an immature party person and was not the consummate team player or defender he would become. His Indiana playoff fiasco years later shows what I mean. 2007-08 Pierce, though he had worse stats, is a more mature and better all around player.

Pierce was 4th in the league in Defensive Win Shares in 2001-2002.  He had a DRTG below 100, which is excellent.  He led his team to the Eastern Conference Finals.  He was an incredibly efficient scorer for someone scoring 26 ppg (57% TS%).  That is also the year where Pierce led that dramatic 4th quarter comeback against the Nets.  I know NJ ended up winning the series, but game 3 was awesome. 

And none of the negatives you are talking about applies to the 01-02 including the Indiana playoff series which wasn't that year. 

That's an interesting stance. I think Nick has a valid point with pointing to the person Pierce would become, but your contention basically is 'he held his crap together that year, so he'll hold his crap together with my team, because that's how this single season thing works'.

Yeah, I can see both points, but I think moranis is a nose ahead.

If you are looking at one season and one season only, that is the only thing you can do.  Nick wants to bring in negatives from future seasons, but doesn't want to bring in the positives, that isn't right.  Either you bring in the future (or the past for that matter) or you don't, but you can't just bring in part of it, you have to bring it all in.

What negatives from the future am I allowing in exactly?

[Rondo2287]

I like the Pierce pick just not the year. Here is where I don't like Roy's thoughts on evaluating a player outside of that year. The year in question Pierce was an immature party person and was not the consummate team player or defender he would become. His Indiana playoff fiasco years later shows what I mean. 2007-08 Pierce, though he had worse stats, is a more mature and better all around player.

Pierce was 4th in the league in Defensive Win Shares in 2001-2002.  He had a DRTG below 100, which is excellent.  He led his team to the Eastern Conference Finals.  He was an incredibly efficient scorer for someone scoring 26 ppg (57% TS%).  That is also the year where Pierce led that dramatic 4th quarter comeback against the Nets.  I know NJ ended up winning the series, but game 3 was awesome. 

And none of the negatives you are talking about applies to the 01-02 including the Indiana playoff series which wasn't that year. 

That's an interesting stance. I think Nick has a valid point with pointing to the person Pierce would become, but your contention basically is 'he held his crap together that year, so he'll hold his crap together with my team, because that's how this single season thing works'.

Yeah, I can see both points, but I think moranis is a nose ahead.

If you are looking at one season and one season only, that is the only thing you can do.  Nick wants to bring in negatives from future seasons, but doesn't want to bring in the positives, that isn't right.  Either you bring in the future (or the past for that matter) or you don't, but you can't just bring in part of it, you have to bring it all in.

What negatives from the future am I allowing in exactly?

He probably means the decreased production.  But on a team with a ton of all stars you don't need pierce to score 26pts, but you do need him to play solid D.  I dont look  on pierces dropped offensive production due to playing team ball as a negatie though.

[GreenFaith1819]

I think, to Moranis' credit, that he could (IMO) use that 01-02 season.

After Antoine Walker gave Pierce that infamous Pep Talk on the bench - I think in that Indy game - Paul seemed to finally get it.

To my memory, after 'Toine's talk, Paul came back out and helped to put the team on his back.

Paul lit Indy up after that.