How Larry Legend built a contender

[kozlodoev]

I just don't get what people have against the draft, especially when our team is unable to sign top free agents. Every player pretty much comes in the league through the draft, and there are people whose entire career is evaluating talent, sure they're not perfect but they also haven't been sensationalist in comparing every good draft class to 2003.

This year they did.

We aren't going to win the title this year that's a fact. So yeah lose a few more games and try to get one of these kids and if we don't get lucky move on, the year is no more wasted because we won 23 than if we won 30.

Any basketball fan can see the talent in these kids, Parker, Randle and Wiggins all look like they will grow into great nba players. What is wrong with trying to get them, and if not them one of the other good players in the draft.

So whats the harm?

I have nothing against the draft. I have something against the idea that the draft is some sort of a surefire salvation, and that it's worth giving away serviceable players, and developing poor habits with young players (see Jefferson, Al).

Is that really the only course on the table between 'being bad enough to get a good pick' and 'playing to win' though?

I mean..who are the 'winning attitude' guys that we can't trade? Rondo, I guess, but I think (without doing a poll or anything) that most people (like me) who are excited about this draft would only trade Rondo for a package that is almost a 'insta-build' with very good prospects and hopefully salary relief built in. Jeff Green is a good player as well, but I doubt anyone is advocating trading him for $.60 on the dollar either.

And Id also disagree that being on a losing team automatically makes players with bad or unwelcome habits. It happened with Tyreke Evans and Al Jefferson, but it seemed to work alright for Jeff Green, Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, Damian Lillard, John Wall, Kevin Love (not that they won anything yet...just that they seem to be capable leaders with an urge to win).

To a certain degree, a large degree Id argue, players can 'learn to win' or 'learn to lose', but it's also probable that players just are who they are sometimes too. Nobody is going to teach Jabari Parker or Marcus Smart to lose, anymore than they could teach Big Al or Eddy Curry how to put winning at the front of their daily menu.

By "giving away serviceable guys" I mean trading away someone like Crawford, Lee, or Bass just to shed a relatively small amount of annual salary and get an unappetizing pick that may end up being someone like Elliot Williams or Marcus Banks.

And it's not about "winning attitude guys" -- it's about going into each game with the idea that you're not going to win, so not only do you only care about getting your stats, but you also have no idea what it takes to win. Pierce did mention that there were some guys on that infamous 06-07 roster that "only cared about getting their 16 points". And to this day, Jefferson remains a guy who puts up great stats, but is patently unable of doing the proverbial little things that make a winning team.

[Section301]

Perhaps if we follow this mold, we too can be great in 2021.

Right. Let's follow the mold of the Clippers. After all, all those top draft picks they had turned them around in just a couple of years, right? Oh wait...

Silly.

The last draft that compared to this was arguably the 2003 draft.

The teams that "bottomed out" the year before with less than 30 wins:

Denver - 17 wins
Cleveland - 17 wins
Toronto - 24 wins
Miami - 25 wins
Clippers - 27 wins
Memphis - 28 wins

Memphis didn't own their own draft pick... so obviously that was a poorly run franchise we can forget about. 

HOw did the 2003 draft change the fortunes of the other 5 teams?

#1 - Denver took Melo.  They immediately went from 17 win team to 43 win playoff team.  Because of that draft, they have not missed the playoffs since.  A decade straight of playoff appearances.  Between 43-57 win.


#2 - Cleveland took Bron.  A transcendent player who transformed the team essentially by himself.  They were in the playoffs by Year 3.  Made the Finals in Year 4.  LeBron took them from a 17 win team to a 66 win contender.


#3 - Toronto took Chris Bosh.  This did not work out as well for them.  It took Bosh 4 years to lead them to the playoffs.  He was the centerpiece of a 47 win team.


#4 - Miami took Dwayne Wade.  Playoffs his rookie season.   Eastern Conference Finals his second season.  Champion his third season.  It's the gift that has kept on giving for Miami... as a direct result of this draft, they have won 3 championships. 

#5 - Clippers took Chris Kaman.  Capable big man who peaked out averaging 16 points, 13 boards and 3 blocks.  He was a key contributor on a 47 win playoff team his 3rd season.


By my count, every single team that bottomed out in 2002 and had a 2003 draft pick became a playoff team within 1-4 years.

Tanking during transcendent drafts is a smart move.

Or, looking at it another way..5 teams tanked for a loaded draft, and only one has gotten a championship out of it 10 years later.  And that team had the fifth pick in that draft.  Worse yet, the team that got the #1 pick in that draft got the transcendent player of his generation, but failed to win with him, lost him, and was stuck in another ugly rebuild 7 years later.  Toronto's not so competitive these days, either.

I agree that getting exceptional talent in the draft is a good idea.  But even when you race to the bottom in a loaded draft the probability that you'll end up a champion is slim.  For the 5 teams in the 2003 draft, so far it's a 20% hit rate 10 years later.

Is it worth pointing out that for the 30 teams in the NBA, only about ten of them have won a championship since the ABA merger?

Yes, it is.  It's also worth pointing out that since 2000 9 of the 14 champions were either led a lottery pick that the winning team didn't pick themselves (Miami with Bron x2, Boston with KG, LA w/Shaq x3, Detroit w/Sheed or Billups - your choice) or by a player that wasn't even a top 10 pick (LA w/Kobe x2). If you're going to argue Kobe was the best player on the Shaq Laker teams, he's still low lottery.

[indeedproceed]

I just don't get what people have against the draft, especially when our team is unable to sign top free agents. Every player pretty much comes in the league through the draft, and there are people whose entire career is evaluating talent, sure they're not perfect but they also haven't been sensationalist in comparing every good draft class to 2003.

This year they did.

We aren't going to win the title this year that's a fact. So yeah lose a few more games and try to get one of these kids and if we don't get lucky move on, the year is no more wasted because we won 23 than if we won 30.

Any basketball fan can see the talent in these kids, Parker, Randle and Wiggins all look like they will grow into great nba players. What is wrong with trying to get them, and if not them one of the other good players in the draft.

So whats the harm?

I have nothing against the draft. I have something against the idea that the draft is some sort of a surefire salvation, and that it's worth giving away serviceable players, and developing poor habits with young players (see Jefferson, Al).

Is that really the only course on the table between 'being bad enough to get a good pick' and 'playing to win' though?

I mean..who are the 'winning attitude' guys that we can't trade? Rondo, I guess, but I think (without doing a poll or anything) that most people (like me) who are excited about this draft would only trade Rondo for a package that is almost a 'insta-build' with very good prospects and hopefully salary relief built in. Jeff Green is a good player as well, but I doubt anyone is advocating trading him for $.60 on the dollar either.

And Id also disagree that being on a losing team automatically makes players with bad or unwelcome habits. It happened with Tyreke Evans and Al Jefferson, but it seemed to work alright for Jeff Green, Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, Damian Lillard, John Wall, Kevin Love (not that they won anything yet...just that they seem to be capable leaders with an urge to win).

To a certain degree, a large degree Id argue, players can 'learn to win' or 'learn to lose', but it's also probable that players just are who they are sometimes too. Nobody is going to teach Jabari Parker or Marcus Smart to lose, anymore than they could teach Big Al or Eddy Curry how to put winning at the front of their daily menu.

By "giving away serviceable guys" I mean trading away someone like Crawford, Lee, or Bass just to shed a relatively small amount of annual salary and get an unappetizing pick that may end up being someone like Elliot Williams or Marcus Banks.

And it's not about "winning attitude guys" -- it's about going into each game with the idea that you're not going to win, so not only do you only care about getting your stats, but you also have no idea what it takes to win. Pierce did mention that there were some guys on that infamous 06-07 roster that "only cared about getting their 16 points". And to this day, Jefferson remains a guy who puts up great stats, but is patently unable of doing the proverbial little things that make a winning team.

Yeah, but Rondo was on that team too. I'm assuming that he's not patently unable of doing the proverbial little things that make a winning team (which in Jefferson's case I'd argue you're being a bit over the top, he's never had a decent team around him..how do we know how good he could or couldn't have done..not that in this last instance it is anyone's fault than his own).

[indeedproceed]

Yes, it is.  It's also worth pointing out that since 2000 9 of the 14 champions were either led a lottery pick that the winning team didn't pick themselves (Miami with Bron x2, Boston with KG, LA w/Shaq x3, Detroit w/Sheed or Billups - your choice) or by a player that wasn't even a top 10 pick (LA w/Kobe x2). If you're going to argue Kobe was the best player on the Shaq Laker teams, he's still low lottery.

Yes, lots of teams have made trades/signings that made them contenders, but without a significant player that the team drafted themselves and kept (Kobe, Pierce, Wade) the only team that actually fits the paradigm of not rebuilding through the draft is Detroit, and if they hadn't of completely whiffed on the Darko pick, they'd likely have gotten more out of their championship core than they did.

[PhoSita]

Indiana won 32 games the season before drafting Paul George. They did a very poor job of tanking.

If they'd won 7 fewer games, they could have had a chance to draft Wesley Johnson or Ekpe Udoh. Maybe even Evan Turner.

Or maybe they would have traded down a few spots and gotten George at #10 plus additional assets.

[BballTim]

Perhaps if we follow this mold, we too can be great in 2021.

Right. Let's follow the mold of the Clippers. After all, all those top draft picks they had turned them around in just a couple of years, right? Oh wait...

Silly.

The last draft that compared to this was arguably the 2003 draft.

The teams that "bottomed out" the year before with less than 30 wins:

Denver - 17 wins
Cleveland - 17 wins
Toronto - 24 wins
Miami - 25 wins
Clippers - 27 wins
Memphis - 28 wins

Memphis didn't own their own draft pick... so obviously that was a poorly run franchise we can forget about. 

HOw did the 2003 draft change the fortunes of the other 5 teams?

#1 - Denver took Melo.  They immediately went from 17 win team to 43 win playoff team.  Because of that draft, they have not missed the playoffs since.  A decade straight of playoff appearances.  Between 43-57 win.


#2 - Cleveland took Bron.  A transcendent player who transformed the team essentially by himself.  They were in the playoffs by Year 3.  Made the Finals in Year 4.  LeBron took them from a 17 win team to a 66 win contender.


#3 - Toronto took Chris Bosh.  This did not work out as well for them.  It took Bosh 4 years to lead them to the playoffs.  He was the centerpiece of a 47 win team.


#4 - Miami took Dwayne Wade.  Playoffs his rookie season.   Eastern Conference Finals his second season.  Champion his third season.  It's the gift that has kept on giving for Miami... as a direct result of this draft, they have won 3 championships. 

#5 - Clippers took Chris Kaman.  Capable big man who peaked out averaging 16 points, 13 boards and 3 blocks.  He was a key contributor on a 47 win playoff team his 3rd season.


By my count, every single team that bottomed out in 2002 and had a 2003 draft pick became a playoff team within 1-4 years.

Tanking during transcendent drafts is a smart move.

  So aside from the Cavs with LeBron, Shaq requesting a trade from the Lakers is the only thing that saved any of those other franchises from perpetual mediocrity.

[kozlodoev]

Yeah, but Rondo was on that team too. I'm assuming that he's not patently unable of doing the proverbial little things that make a winning team (which in Jefferson's case I'd argue you're being a bit over the top, he's never had a decent team around him..how do we know how good he could or couldn't have done..not that in this last instance it is anyone's fault than his own).

Rondo played a fairly limited role on that team (just the same way Jefferson played a fairly limited role on the 45-win team he was on as a rookie). So I feel the good habits were drilled into him the following year when he was  thrust into a considerably expanded role on a team with much higher aspirations.

Jefferson, by the way, had some pretty decent teams in Utah and all he has to show for it is one 43-win season.

[kozlodoev]

Yes, it is.  It's also worth pointing out that since 2000 9 of the 14 champions were either led a lottery pick that the winning team didn't pick themselves (Miami with Bron x2, Boston with KG, LA w/Shaq x3, Detroit w/Sheed or Billups - your choice) or by a player that wasn't even a top 10 pick (LA w/Kobe x2). If you're going to argue Kobe was the best player on the Shaq Laker teams, he's still low lottery.

Yes, lots of teams have made trades/signings that made them contenders, but without a significant player that the team drafted themselves and kept (Kobe, Pierce, Wade) the only team that actually fits the paradigm of not rebuilding through the draft is Detroit, and if they hadn't of completely whiffed on the Darko pick, they'd likely have gotten more out of their championship core than they did.

It's only fitting that between Kobe, Pierce and Wade there are no players picked higher than #5.

[BballTim]

Yeah, but Rondo was on that team too. I'm assuming that he's not patently unable of doing the proverbial little things that make a winning team (which in Jefferson's case I'd argue you're being a bit over the top, he's never had a decent team around him..how do we know how good he could or couldn't have done..not that in this last instance it is anyone's fault than his own).

Rondo played a fairly limited role on that team (just the same way Jefferson played a fairly limited role on the 45-win team he was on as a rookie). So I feel the good habits were drilled into him the following year when he was  thrust into a considerably expanded role on a team with much higher aspirations.

Jefferson, by the way, had some pretty decent teams in Utah and all he has to show for it is one 43-win season.

  Yes, they've been playing much better since Jefferson left.

[indeedproceed]

Yeah, but Rondo was on that team too. I'm assuming that he's not patently unable of doing the proverbial little things that make a winning team (which in Jefferson's case I'd argue you're being a bit over the top, he's never had a decent team around him..how do we know how good he could or couldn't have done..not that in this last instance it is anyone's fault than his own).

Rondo played a fairly limited role on that team (just the same way Jefferson played a fairly limited role on the 45-win team he was on as a rookie). So I feel the good habits were drilled into him the following year when he was  thrust into a considerably expanded role on a team with much higher aspirations.

Jefferson, by the way, had some pretty decent teams in Utah and all he has to show for it is one 43-win season.

You think playing in 75 games at a 23.5 MPG clip and starting 25 games is 'fairly limited' for a rookie? He started the last 21 games of the season and played significantly during the losing streak (25+ MPG average over the 19 games).

Seems like a weak premise to me. I don't disagree that it can happen, but I'm having a hard time figuring guys who fell victim to it outside of Al Jefferson, who has vastly outperformed his draft expectations.

[LarBrd33]

Perhaps if we follow this mold, we too can be great in 2021.

Right. Let's follow the mold of the Clippers. After all, all those top draft picks they had turned them around in just a couple of years, right? Oh wait...

Silly.

The last draft that compared to this was arguably the 2003 draft.

The teams that "bottomed out" the year before with less than 30 wins:

Denver - 17 wins
Cleveland - 17 wins
Toronto - 24 wins
Miami - 25 wins
Clippers - 27 wins
Memphis - 28 wins

Memphis didn't own their own draft pick... so obviously that was a poorly run franchise we can forget about. 

HOw did the 2003 draft change the fortunes of the other 5 teams?

#1 - Denver took Melo.  They immediately went from 17 win team to 43 win playoff team.  Because of that draft, they have not missed the playoffs since.  A decade straight of playoff appearances.  Between 43-57 win.


#2 - Cleveland took Bron.  A transcendent player who transformed the team essentially by himself.  They were in the playoffs by Year 3.  Made the Finals in Year 4.  LeBron took them from a 17 win team to a 66 win contender.


#3 - Toronto took Chris Bosh.  This did not work out as well for them.  It took Bosh 4 years to lead them to the playoffs.  He was the centerpiece of a 47 win team.


#4 - Miami took Dwayne Wade.  Playoffs his rookie season.   Eastern Conference Finals his second season.  Champion his third season.  It's the gift that has kept on giving for Miami... as a direct result of this draft, they have won 3 championships. 

#5 - Clippers took Chris Kaman.  Capable big man who peaked out averaging 16 points, 13 boards and 3 blocks.  He was a key contributor on a 47 win playoff team his 3rd season.


By my count, every single team that bottomed out in 2002 and had a 2003 draft pick became a playoff team within 1-4 years.

Tanking during transcendent drafts is a smart move.

  So aside from the Cavs with LeBron, Shaq requesting a trade from the Lakers is the only thing that saved any of those other franchises from perpetual mediocrity.

Yeah... you obviously don't really believe that.  Dwayne Wade (and the refs) carried that 2006 Miami team to a title.  He won Finals MVP.... not Shaq.


And like I said, Denver hasn't missed the playoffs since drafting Melo.   Cavs had a 5 year run of contention... technically they were title threat longer than KG/Pierce/Ray were. 

If all we get out of this tank job is a half-decade of contention, it was worth it.  )

Course, the new CBA makes it more difficult for superstars to flee the team that drafted them... They are locked in for 4 years and there is major incentives for them to sign extensions...   You should easily hang onto the guy for the first 8 years of his career.

[LooseCannon]

Oh dear another one of those threads where pro tanking folk and anti tanking folk bash each other with whatever stats suit their argument. Clearly both methods among several other can work. Why the hair ball? The real difference I see between successful and disastrous rebuilds is the competence of the front office running the show. At the end of the day some of us take the train to work others use the bus, yet most of us consistently get to work on time because we are competent enough to know how to manage the risks of commuting using whatever means we settle for.

An anti-tanking person like me wants to win but sees tanking (or trying to win and failing) as a plan B.  I'd support shifting to tanking mid-season if the team is once again hit hard by injuries.

As I see it, the pro-tanking folk usually see getting a high draft pick as the only way to get relevant.  Many of them don't seem to believe a competent front office can rebuild without getting that pick or getting really lucky.

[kozlodoev]

Yeah, but Rondo was on that team too. I'm assuming that he's not patently unable of doing the proverbial little things that make a winning team (which in Jefferson's case I'd argue you're being a bit over the top, he's never had a decent team around him..how do we know how good he could or couldn't have done..not that in this last instance it is anyone's fault than his own).

Rondo played a fairly limited role on that team (just the same way Jefferson played a fairly limited role on the 45-win team he was on as a rookie). So I feel the good habits were drilled into him the following year when he was  thrust into a considerably expanded role on a team with much higher aspirations.

Jefferson, by the way, had some pretty decent teams in Utah and all he has to show for it is one 43-win season.

You think playing in 75 games at a 23.5 MPG clip and starting 25 games is 'fairly limited' for a rookie? He started the last 21 games of the season and played significantly during the losing streak (25+ MPG average over the 19 games).

Seems like a weak premise to me. I don't disagree that it can happen, but I'm having a hard time figuring guys who fell victim to it outside of Al Jefferson, who has vastly outperformed his draft expectations.

Maybe it's a weak premise. Rudy Gay is another name that comes to mind, Vin Baker may be another.

It just seems to me like there are always some talented guys who put up big numbers on bad teams, then struggle when they end up with an organization with aspirations, because they suddenly figure out that putting up big numbers is not what makes wins.

[kozlodoev]

Yeah, but Rondo was on that team too. I'm assuming that he's not patently unable of doing the proverbial little things that make a winning team (which in Jefferson's case I'd argue you're being a bit over the top, he's never had a decent team around him..how do we know how good he could or couldn't have done..not that in this last instance it is anyone's fault than his own).

Rondo played a fairly limited role on that team (just the same way Jefferson played a fairly limited role on the 45-win team he was on as a rookie). So I feel the good habits were drilled into him the following year when he was  thrust into a considerably expanded role on a team with much higher aspirations.

Jefferson, by the way, had some pretty decent teams in Utah and all he has to show for it is one 43-win season.

  Yes, they've been playing much better since Jefferson left.

The good teams I am referring to also had Willams, Millsap, Okur, Kirilenko...none of which is with the team any longer. Fact is, the Jazz swapped Boozer for Jefferson, which was considered an upgrade -- and while the rest of their roster remained intact, they went from being a 53-win to a 39-win team, and never really recovered during Jefferson's tenure there.

[Moranis]

Yeah, but Rondo was on that team too. I'm assuming that he's not patently unable of doing the proverbial little things that make a winning team (which in Jefferson's case I'd argue you're being a bit over the top, he's never had a decent team around him..how do we know how good he could or couldn't have done..not that in this last instance it is anyone's fault than his own).

Rondo played a fairly limited role on that team (just the same way Jefferson played a fairly limited role on the 45-win team he was on as a rookie). So I feel the good habits were drilled into him the following year when he was  thrust into a considerably expanded role on a team with much higher aspirations.

Jefferson, by the way, had some pretty decent teams in Utah and all he has to show for it is one 43-win season.

You think playing in 75 games at a 23.5 MPG clip and starting 25 games is 'fairly limited' for a rookie? He started the last 21 games of the season and played significantly during the losing streak (25+ MPG average over the 19 games).

Seems like a weak premise to me. I don't disagree that it can happen, but I'm having a hard time figuring guys who fell victim to it outside of Al Jefferson, who has vastly outperformed his draft expectations.

Maybe it's a weak premise. Rudy Gay is another name that comes to mind, Vin Baker may be another.

It just seems to me like there are always some talented guys who put up big numbers on bad teams, then struggle when they end up with an organization with aspirations, because they suddenly figure out that putting up big numbers is not what makes wins.

Ricky Davis.