2011 CB Historical Draft - Draft Thread

[Fafnir]

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.

People change all the time for the better and the worst. Young players often come in hungry and humble and ended up with bloated egos demanding star treatment. Pierce for example as a rookie was a very good defensive player and then got lazier and lazier as he became a star, and now is back to working very hard again.

And my point is still valid, if you're going to knock Pierce's defense and committment to team play with a different year's outburst it goes against the spirit of this game. Once you open that line of criticism then I think you can justly refute it with his later team play once he was on a winner.

[StartOrien]

Pierce has definitely transformed as a player throughout the years. I see the merits in picking both young Pierce as well as mature Pierce

[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.

What negatives from the future am I allowing in exactly?

your evidence of immaturity was from future seasons.  

Should we hold the brawl at the Palace against J. O'Neal.  I mean he flat out decked someone that must mean he was always immature and ready to fight and must be accounted for in whatever year you chose of his.  It doesn't work like that.  

Pierce was an excellent defender in 2001-2002.  He was also a much better team defender that year then you are giving him credit for.  Boston was 9th in points given up a game and 3rd in opponents FG%.  In fact Boston was a better defensive team then they were an offensive team that year.  The numbers bear that out.

Sure when Boston was struggling and was one of the worst teams in the league, Pierce had issues with focus on the defensive side of the ball, but all players do that, but that was not the case in 2001-02.  Frankly I think you are letting the mid-2000's cloud your memory of the early 2000's.

[Fafnir]

What negatives from the future am I allowing in exactly?

Your primary evidence of how immature he was came from a different year.

You don't think three years of frustrating playoff exits after the ECF run, being on bad teams, and increasingly being asked to carry the load didn't hurt Pierce's attitude?

[Edgar]

Great things today thus far

Isiah
Dumars
Ewing
Pierce

Love to see this guys goes here

Now

I have one or 2 picks for tomorrow
Specially One that a team could use badly

One binkie of all times still there.

Interesting.

[mgent]

I don't see any disadvantages to the 2008 Pierce.  He was still the same player, just with less usage.  He drove just as much, he dunked just as much, he still his signature jumpers whenever he wanted, and I think he even got better at shooting 3s competing with Ray instead of Toine.  

The only argument I could see is that he was no longer the best in the league at getting to the line.  However I think a big part of that was simply because the refs stopped giving him the same respect.  They moved on to younger superstars.

[Fafnir]

I don't see any disadvantages to the 2008 Pierce.  He was still the same player, just with less usage.  He drove just as much, he dunked just as much, he still his signature jumpers whenever he wanted, and I think he even got better at shooting 3s competing with Ray instead of Toine.  

The only argument I could see is that he was no longer the best in the league at getting to the line.  However I think a big part of that was simply because the refs stopped giving him the same respect.  They moved on to younger superstars.

Pierce has three possible years to pick from, its a tough choice for a variety of reasons.

[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.

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.

People change all the time for the better and the worst. Young players often come in hungry and humble and ended up with bloated egos demanding star treatment. Pierce for example as a rookie was a very good defensive player and then got lazier and lazier as he became a star, and now is back to working very hard again.

And my point is still valid, if you're going to knock Pierce's defense and committment to team play with a different year's outburst it goes against the spirit of this game. Once you open that line of criticism then I think you can justly refute it with his later team play once he was on a winner.

I don't think it was laziness as a result of becoming a star as much as it was laziness (or lack of focus) as a result of the team losing.  When you are losing you just lack the effort to try all the time since you don't get the result you want, so why bother.  It isn't right, but it is human nature and happens to everyone.  

[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.

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.

Well I could see how some of what Nick is saying is valid though. This:

The year in question Pierce was an immature party person and was not the consummate team player or defender he would become.

I'd be inclined to side with this, but even if he wasn't a defensive leader, he had great defensive numbers on a team that ranked 5th in the league in defensive rating (pp 100 poss), so he must have played at least competent team defense.

[Redz]

Great things today thus far

Isiah
Dumars
Ewing
Pierce

Love to see this guys goes here

Now

I have one or 2 picks for tomorrow
Specially One that a team could use badly

One binkie of all times still there.

Interesting.

Don't worry Edgar, I'm sure Delonte will slip until at least the 6th round 

[StartOrien]

BTW,

Alonzo Mourning 99-99'

20.1 ppg, 11.1 rebs, 3.9 blocks

[Moranis]

I don't see any disadvantages to the 2008 Pierce.  He was still the same player, just with less usage.  He drove just as much, he dunked just as much, he still his signature jumpers whenever he wanted, and I think he even got better at shooting 3s competing with Ray instead of Toine.  

The only argument I could see is that he was no longer the best in the league at getting to the line.  However I think a big part of that was simply because the refs stopped giving him the same respect.  They moved on to younger superstars.

His efficiency in many areas is not as good in 2008 as it was in 2001.  It isn't about just volume.  He turned the ball over more, rebounded less, stole the ball less, blocked the ball less, and had nearly identical shooting efficiency.  His DRTG was worse, though his ORTG was better.  He was also a better passer in 08.  

But the real thing is, by 2008 Pierce could not play SG.  He had lost a lot of his lateral quickness and could no longer keep up with opposing SG's.  On a team with Lebron James, I can't have the slower Paul Pierce.  I have to have the SG not the SF.

[indeedproceed]

BTW,

Alonzo Mourning 99-99'

20.1 ppg, 11.1 rebs, 3.9 blocks

Yeah but guys were smaller back then. Imagine what he'd do against modern athletes fueled by modern performance enhancers and reruns of Khloe and Lamar. Alonzo wouldn't have stood a chance. Pas une chance.

[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.

People change all the time for the better and the worst. Young players often come in hungry and humble and ended up with bloated egos demanding star treatment. Pierce for example as a rookie was a very good defensive player and then got lazier and lazier as he became a star, and now is back to working very hard again.

And my point is still valid, if you're going to knock Pierce's defense and committment to team play with a different year's outburst it goes against the spirit of this game. Once you open that line of criticism then I think you can justly refute it with his later team play once he was on a winner.

Let me say that I completely disagree with you regarding maturity. Just because someone might conform for a while and give an appearance of something does not mean they have matured mentally or emotionally. You are completely wrong regarding that and we can agree to disagree.

Second, the outburst is only one of many circumstances that showed that Pierce was immature during his early seasons. Pouting when not getting his way, friction with coaches, shot selection, his nightlife ongoings. I am not holding that against him for his earlier season. All I am saying is that years later he was still immature and human nature is such that young men in their 20's do not go from being mature to immature to mature.

Anyway, Moranis, I like the pick. I think Pierce is awesome. I just think your selection of the year is a good example of why I set the rules at using just one year. Its because players change and you can't have it every way. You can't have the young, mobile defensive minded McHale pre injury and the scoring minded mature post injury McHale. You can't have selfish scoring machine Bob McAdoo and the team oriented mature Bob McAdoo. You can't have rebounding defensive beast Bill walton and Sixth Man of the Year bench playing Bill Walton. You have to choose one.

The Gary Payton debate is another good example. You can pick a year where he was a good three point shooter to offset the fact that he wasn't a great three point shooter but if he wasn't nearly the defensive player or free throw shooter or rebounder or passer that he was in other years you have to live with that.

[StartOrien]

BTW,

Alonzo Mourning 99-99'

20.1 ppg, 11.1 rebs, 3.9 blocks

Yeah but guys were smaller back then. Imagine what he'd do against modern athletes fueled by modern performance enhancers and reruns of Khloe and Lamar. Alonzo wouldn't have stood a chance. Pas une chance.

If Alonzo Mourning was still running right now he'd be dominating the unisex perfume market with a perfume line called "Za"