Article: NBA Wakes to find 2014 Draft Not All That

[Eddie20]

This is why Embiid has been skyrocketing up the board for me (and it seems, for a lot of GMs). Some of the concerns against Jabari have actually always been around, it's just that his performance at the start of the college season brought him a wave of hype and he passed Wiggins on mocks.

Anyway, it's still possible for a lot to change between now and the draft. Maybe somebody outside the top 6 will raise their stock with a great performance in the tournament.

Griffin, Irving, and Wall weren't as highly regarded #1 overall picks as the article makes them out to be. It's revisionist history to suggest otherwise.

Yeah I do think there's a little revisionist history with those three but they were still pretty "safe" no 1s. I guess it depends on whether you view Parker as a safe guy.

I view Parker as the surest thing in this draft. If he stays healthy Parker is going to be a 10 time all-star. The kid is a stud , and no slower or less athletic than PP or Melo .

And what has melo accomplished so far in the nba? (Outside of poor fg per and jacking up a ton of shots). Just saying

Parker has done little to prove he is the surest thing in this draft. Aaron gordon has proved more so far

Absolutely not. What position will Gordon play in the pros? Too small to play the 4 and his lack of ballhandling and shooting prevents him from effectively playing the 3.

I think Gordon has really high bust potential.

[SCeltic34]

Was reading a random article, a Q&A with Mitch Kupchak, and this is what he had to say:

MT: Is the coming NBA Draft as deep and good as has been reported?
Kupchak: Right now, I would say one through 10 is as good as I've seen in a long time.

MT: Like going back to the LeBron-Anthony-Bosh-Wade 2003 Draft?
Kupchak: Yeah, that’s the first draft that comes to mind. Going into that draft, I’m not sure everyone knew that would be such a great draft, but looking back on it, it really was. We'll have to wait and see how this one turns out, but I think it has the potential to be a heck of a draft from one through 10.

Kupchak is a good GM.  Take it for what it's worth; personally, I'll take his draft quality assessment over a sports writer any day.

[Celtics18]

Was reading a random article, a Q&A with Mitch Kupchak, and this is what he had to say:

MT: Is the coming NBA Draft as deep and good as has been reported?
Kupchak: Right now, I would say one through 10 is as good as I've seen in a long time.

MT: Like going back to the LeBron-Anthony-Bosh-Wade 2003 Draft?
Kupchak: Yeah, that’s the first draft that comes to mind. Going into that draft, I’m not sure everyone knew that would be such a great draft, but looking back on it, it really was. We'll have to wait and see how this one turns out, but I think it has the potential to be a heck of a draft from one through 10.

Kupchak is a good GM.  Take it for what it's worth; personally, I'll take his draft quality assessment over a sports writer any day.

So, that means that the 6th through 10th best players in this draft will be on par with the likes of Kyle Korver, Boris Diaw, Mo Williams, Luke Ridnour, and Nick Collison.  Nice. 

[Eddie20]

Was reading a random article, a Q&A with Mitch Kupchak, and this is what he had to say:

MT: Is the coming NBA Draft as deep and good as has been reported?
Kupchak: Right now, I would say one through 10 is as good as I've seen in a long time.

MT: Like going back to the LeBron-Anthony-Bosh-Wade 2003 Draft?
Kupchak: Yeah, that’s the first draft that comes to mind. Going into that draft, I’m not sure everyone knew that would be such a great draft, but looking back on it, it really was. We'll have to wait and see how this one turns out, but I think it has the potential to be a heck of a draft from one through 10.

Kupchak is a good GM.  Take it for what it's worth; personally, I'll take his draft quality assessment over a sports writer any day.

So, that means that the 6th through 10th best players in this draft will be on par with the likes of Kyle Korver, Boris Diaw, Mo Williams, Luke Ridnour, and Nick Collison.  Nice.

Elaborate.

[Celtics18]

Was reading a random article, a Q&A with Mitch Kupchak, and this is what he had to say:

MT: Is the coming NBA Draft as deep and good as has been reported?
Kupchak: Right now, I would say one through 10 is as good as I've seen in a long time.

MT: Like going back to the LeBron-Anthony-Bosh-Wade 2003 Draft?
Kupchak: Yeah, that’s the first draft that comes to mind. Going into that draft, I’m not sure everyone knew that would be such a great draft, but looking back on it, it really was. We'll have to wait and see how this one turns out, but I think it has the potential to be a heck of a draft from one through 10.

Kupchak is a good GM.  Take it for what it's worth; personally, I'll take his draft quality assessment over a sports writer any day.

So, that means that the 6th through 10th best players in this draft will be on par with the likes of Kyle Korver, Boris Diaw, Mo Williams, Luke Ridnour, and Nick Collison.  Nice.

Elaborate.

The guys I mentioned arguably round out the top ten players from the 2003 draft. 

[BballTim]

Was reading a random article, a Q&A with Mitch Kupchak, and this is what he had to say:

MT: Is the coming NBA Draft as deep and good as has been reported?
Kupchak: Right now, I would say one through 10 is as good as I've seen in a long time.

MT: Like going back to the LeBron-Anthony-Bosh-Wade 2003 Draft?
Kupchak: Yeah, that’s the first draft that comes to mind. Going into that draft, I’m not sure everyone knew that would be such a great draft, but looking back on it, it really was. We'll have to wait and see how this one turns out, but I think it has the potential to be a heck of a draft from one through 10.

Kupchak is a good GM.  Take it for what it's worth; personally, I'll take his draft quality assessment over a sports writer any day.

  If you're going that route you have to include Danny's assessment of the draft, which iirc was that there weren't any players in the draft worth tanking for.

[nickagneta]

And let's not kid ourselves here Julius Randle's stats thus far far exceed Tim Duncan's freshman year.  Andrew Wiggin's is pretty much on par with Dwyane Wade's freshman year and better than Paul George's.  Jabari Parker is better than Wiggins statistically right now.  Embiid is certainly raw, but his per minute numbers compare well with some of the great centers freshman numbers (and far exceed the Dream's who he is often compared to).

Now sure these guys would be lucky to have a NBA career like any of those players, but people always tend to forget what many of the greats looked like as freshman.  Sure Durant and Anthony would studs as freshman, but those are the rare players, not the other way around.

Comparing stats of today's college basketball and years back is a irrelevant thing to do.

It was illegal to play freshmen on a varsity level until the mid to late 70's. Even then, most coaches did play or were tremendously reluctant to play freshmen for years and years after that. Through the 80's, 90's and 00's kids stayed in college longer and the quality of upperclassmen were so much better than today.

Today, college basketball is all about freshmen one and dones. Freshmen today should being outperforming the freshmen of years past by a wide wide margin. If they weren't, then people wouldn't think much of these players.

Besides, I have said it a bunch before, you don't judge draftable talent by stats. You just don't. You judge them on their skills, mentality, physicality and talent.

There are like 25-30 less players in college today that would have been in school 20 years ago.  It isn't like 100 players leave every year.  And of those players they are spread around a bit more today, but not that much.  The reality is 30 years ago there were 40ish players that were worthy of being drafted, today there are still 40ish players that are worthy of being drafted, they just tend to be younger and not quite as polished, but that is about the only real difference.  This notion that the talent level is so diminished in college ball is just silly.

Also, Hakeem played 18.2 minutes as a freshman.  He averaged 8.3 points, 6.5 rebounds, and 2.5 blocks.  It isn't like he was playing 5 minutes a night in mop up.  Joel Embiid is playing 21.4 minutes a game and is averaging 10.5 points, 7.4 rebounds, and 2.4 blocks.  Given they have similar playing time, you can reasonably compare their numbers and in that Hakeem is a better shot blocker and steal generator, but was worse at everything else (including shooting) on a per minute basis.  Again that certainly doesn't mean Embiid will have anything close to the career of the Dream, I just think it is silly to act like he is somehow diminished because he isn't a 20/10 player his freshman year.

Surprised by this post. I always figured you more keen on college sports than you are showing here. If you can't see the difference in quality between college ball now and back in the early 80's, then I don't know what to tell you.

40-60 underclassmen declare for the draft just about every year since the one and done went into effect. Most never make it to the NBA. If instead those people had stayed in school, you are talking 60-100 or more better players playing Division I basketball each year making the competition tougher and the ability to put up stats tougher. Most kids who declare come from teams that make the tourney. Keeping those kids in college for years afterward like they did back in Hakeem's time makes a massive difference in the competition at that level.

BTW, Hakeem red shirted his freshman year. He was a red shirt freshman with the basketball knowledge of a high school sophomore when he sparingly played his freshman year because he just wasn't that good or highly trained at basketball. Most freshman college players nowadays have more basketball taught to them before finishing AAU ball than Hakeem had seen his sophomore year of college.

[Boris Badenov]

Was reading a random article, a Q&A with Mitch Kupchak, and this is what he had to say:

MT: Is the coming NBA Draft as deep and good as has been reported?
Kupchak: Right now, I would say one through 10 is as good as I've seen in a long time.

MT: Like going back to the LeBron-Anthony-Bosh-Wade 2003 Draft?
Kupchak: Yeah, that’s the first draft that comes to mind. Going into that draft, I’m not sure everyone knew that would be such a great draft, but looking back on it, it really was. We'll have to wait and see how this one turns out, but I think it has the potential to be a heck of a draft from one through 10.

Kupchak is a good GM.  Take it for what it's worth; personally, I'll take his draft quality assessment over a sports writer any day.

  If you're going that route you have to include Danny's assessment of the draft, which iirc was that there weren't any players in the draft worth tanking for.

Yeah, but Danny is lying and Kupchak is telling the truth!

Either that or it's the other way around.

Or, both are lying.

I suppose it's also possible that both are telling the truth.

In which case the draft might be either good or bad, depending on who you think is the better judge of talent...or who you think is lying.

You can all thank me now for clearing things up.

[kraidstar]

the "eye test" tells me that several of these players will be stars. has this draft been overhyped by the media? time will tell, but it's not hard to see that there's a lot of talent there.
almost every single NBA championship team has been built around a high draft pick. why do people continue to downplay the importance of the draft, especially what is certainly one of the better drafts in recent history? here's a list of some top-10 draft picks that won championships for the c's: heinsohn, russell, sam jones, havlicek, cowens, bird, mchale, parish, pierce, garnett, judas shuttlesworth... 

[SCeltic34]

Was reading a random article, a Q&A with Mitch Kupchak, and this is what he had to say:

MT: Is the coming NBA Draft as deep and good as has been reported?
Kupchak: Right now, I would say one through 10 is as good as I've seen in a long time.

MT: Like going back to the LeBron-Anthony-Bosh-Wade 2003 Draft?
Kupchak: Yeah, that’s the first draft that comes to mind. Going into that draft, I’m not sure everyone knew that would be such a great draft, but looking back on it, it really was. We'll have to wait and see how this one turns out, but I think it has the potential to be a heck of a draft from one through 10.

Kupchak is a good GM.  Take it for what it's worth; personally, I'll take his draft quality assessment over a sports writer any day.

So, that means that the 6th through 10th best players in this draft will be on par with the likes of Kyle Korver, Boris Diaw, Mo Williams, Luke Ridnour, and Nick Collison.  Nice.

I think he's being honest when he says that the talent at the top of the draft is really, really good, but I don't think that's what he meant at all.

[SCeltic34]

Was reading a random article, a Q&A with Mitch Kupchak, and this is what he had to say:

MT: Is the coming NBA Draft as deep and good as has been reported?
Kupchak: Right now, I would say one through 10 is as good as I've seen in a long time.

MT: Like going back to the LeBron-Anthony-Bosh-Wade 2003 Draft?
Kupchak: Yeah, that’s the first draft that comes to mind. Going into that draft, I’m not sure everyone knew that would be such a great draft, but looking back on it, it really was. We'll have to wait and see how this one turns out, but I think it has the potential to be a heck of a draft from one through 10.

Kupchak is a good GM.  Take it for what it's worth; personally, I'll take his draft quality assessment over a sports writer any day.

  If you're going that route you have to include Danny's assessment of the draft, which iirc was that there weren't any players in the draft worth tanking for.

Just depends on who/what you believe and your interpretation of what they say.  I just put it out there.  I don't think Kupchak is lying about his assessment.

[Tr1boy]

This is why Embiid has been skyrocketing up the board for me (and it seems, for a lot of GMs). Some of the concerns against Jabari have actually always been around, it's just that his performance at the start of the college season brought him a wave of hype and he passed Wiggins on mocks.

Anyway, it's still possible for a lot to change between now and the draft. Maybe somebody outside the top 6 will raise their stock with a great performance in the tournament.

Griffin, Irving, and Wall weren't as highly regarded #1 overall picks as the article makes them out to be. It's revisionist history to suggest otherwise.

Yeah I do think there's a little revisionist history with those three but they were still pretty "safe" no 1s. I guess it depends on whether you view Parker as a safe guy.

I view Parker as the surest thing in this draft. If he stays healthy Parker is going to be a 10 time all-star. The kid is a stud , and no slower or less athletic than PP or Melo .

And what has melo accomplished so far in the nba? (Outside of poor fg per and jacking up a ton of shots). Just saying

Parker has done little to prove he is the surest thing in this draft. Aaron gordon has proved more so far

Absolutely not. What position will Gordon play in the pros? Too small to play the 4 and his lack of ballhandling and shooting prevents him from effectively playing the 3.

I think Gordon has really high bust potential.

How does blake griffin play pf? Gordon is equally as athletic and has a longer wingspa 
He can play pf and has a decent perimeter game. He could see time as sf also

His arizona team being undefeated says it all. He is a big part why. Mature beyond his age

[D.o.s.]

I have been downplaying the quality of this draft for months. These are kids with unreal expectations being thrown upon them. There are no Lebrons or Durants or Hakeems or Karl Malones in this class. Some of these kids will turn out to be good, real good, but its not the Lebron, Wade, Melo class all over again.

so this draft doesn't have players as good as Lebron or Durant? You mean the best two players in the world? What a shocker.

It still has top end talents. I could easily see Parker being as good as Melo, Embiid on Anthony Davis' level, and Randle being as good as Bosh , Wiggins a Paul George type.

What's wrong with that, its still top 20 nba talent if they reach their potential.....

If they reach their potential you are right. Here's the thing, months ago the need was for the C's to get a top 6 pick because there WAS a franchise cornerstone to be had as long as you ended up in the top 6. Now, months later, articles are coming out, play by play and game analysts during college hoops games are coming out, anonymous NBA GMs and scouts and execs(you know, people who get paid to look at these things) are coming out and they are all saying the same thing, this draft isn't what the press made it out to be.

I like DOS's take but only in reverse. I liken it to climate science. 9,581 of 9,582 press media people who do not know sometimes what they are talking about declared this draft the best since___________________(fill in the blank) with unreal amounts of franchise cornerstone talents. The people who knew what the science was all about said very little to nothing. Now that the players can be seen in an environment where their talent can be adequately judged, the people in the know are coming out telling the truth in the science.

There's nothing wrong with having the top end talent of this draft having the potential to be top 25 players in the league at some time. But that's a normal good draft. That's not what this draft was sold to most NBA fans though. I expect a couple of real great players. I expect a couple more guys who will be All-Stars at some point. I expect a whole bunch of players who will be good NBA starters.

But I have been saying for months that these are kids and the expectations being thrown on them are two much and they can not meet those expectations as a group.

And now there's a lot of people in the know coming out saying the same thing.

I'd agree with that. I still think this draft is one of the most rife with talent we've seen in the last ten years, but you're right--any movement either way on that needle is inevitably going to be hyperbole or dismissal.


I'm going to assume most of us watched the draft last year, right? Jay Bilas (I think) said something really, really interesting--that if there had been six guys picked before the number one pick--the Bennets, the Otto Porters-- the Oladipo's, the MCW's-- that everyone would be talking about how deep the draft was.

So, let's consider that fact--that there are probably six or seven players in this draft who have a real shot of being better basketball players than any of the guys taken in the top five in 2013. So you're starting to get into a talent range somewhere around or between Blake Griffin/John Wall/Anthony Davis and the Nerlens/McLemore/Bennett/Porter crew.

Is that a talent level worth missing the playoffs for? Especially for the Celtics?

[obnoxiousmime]

This is why Embiid has been skyrocketing up the board for me (and it seems, for a lot of GMs). Some of the concerns against Jabari have actually always been around, it's just that his performance at the start of the college season brought him a wave of hype and he passed Wiggins on mocks.

Anyway, it's still possible for a lot to change between now and the draft. Maybe somebody outside the top 6 will raise their stock with a great performance in the tournament.

Griffin, Irving, and Wall weren't as highly regarded #1 overall picks as the article makes them out to be. It's revisionist history to suggest otherwise.

Yeah I do think there's a little revisionist history with those three but they were still pretty "safe" no 1s. I guess it depends on whether you view Parker as a safe guy.

I view Parker as the surest thing in this draft. If he stays healthy Parker is going to be a 10 time all-star. The kid is a stud , and no slower or less athletic than PP or Melo .

And what has melo accomplished so far in the nba? (Outside of poor fg per and jacking up a ton of shots). Just saying

Parker has done little to prove he is the surest thing in this draft. Aaron gordon has proved more so far

I think it's amazing how far the Melo bashing has gone, and I don't even like him so much! Just because he didn't turn out to be as good as other stars of his generation doesn't mean his career was a bust or that a Melo comp is now somehow a negative for a prospect.

Also, doesn't a player's intelligence and maturity come into play at some point? Just because physically and offensively they have similarities doesn't mean Parker will carry himself like Melo. Isn't effort a big part of defense?

The books not even really closed on Melo's career anyway. He has never played with another great player unless you count a post-sixers Iverson (the exact wrong player skillswise to match with Melo) or a broken-down Stoudemire. Zach Lowe has frequently brought up Team USA as a good example of what Melo can do when he's got good teammates and the pressure isn't entirely on him. Melo was often the best player on the court in those games.

Personally I think Melo would be a great second banana in terms of leadership and defense and first banana in terms of scoring. As I've said before the Knicks had the right idea with Stoudemire (who embraced being the face of the team) and Chandler (defensive protection) only those guys were too old and injury-prone by the time they reached NY. That would have been a legitimate contender provided they had a better PG than Felton and Shumpert was a few years more experienced (3 and D guy at SG).

[Smokeeye123]

Good news is that we'll likely make the playoffs so it doesn't really matter.  2 games out of 8th and Rondo due back any minute.

**** Ainge won't let us make the 8th seed, Green and Bass will be gone as soon as that starts to happen