Article: NBA Wakes to find 2014 Draft Not All That

[nickagneta]

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.

[Moranis]

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.

to be fair a lot of these guys in the know have a real reason to downplay the draft and particular players i.e. they want to devalue them so they can move up to get them or acquire firsts from other teams, etc. 

[Moranis]

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.

[BballTim]

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.....

  It's possible that any of those players will reach that level, it's unlikely that most of them will. As for LeBron and Durant, those names were being thrown around in terms of the type of player (ie Wiggins) would be in the draft.

[BleedGreen1989]

Lots of people defending this draft it seems.

Not knocking it, but I think the point Nick is bringing up is a valid one.

This draft had too much hype to begin with. It wasn't fair to any of the players coming out. Names like Lebron James, Kevin Durant, Hakeem, Charles Barkely, ect. I think what this article tries to do is slow down the hype train a bit.

Constantly hearing "best draft since 2003" and maybe it will be, but I would be happy with the 2012 Draft with guys like Anthony Davis, Andre Drummund, Damian Lillard, Bradley Beal, Harrison Barnes, ect.

[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.

[rondohondo]

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 .

[BballTim]

And let's not kid ourselves here Julius Randle's stats thus far far exceed Tim Duncan's freshman year.

  Randle's stats are pretty impressive. The closest match I could find for a freshman over the last 15 years is Eddie Griffin.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/eddie-griffin-1.html

[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.

[BleedGreen1989]

And let's not kid ourselves here Julius Randle's stats thus far far exceed Tim Duncan's freshman year.

  Randle's stats are pretty impressive. The closest match I could find for a freshman over the last 15 years is Eddie Griffin.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/eddie-griffin-1.html

Bazinga

[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

[saltlover]

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.

While I agree with your first point about not comparing to the 80s, or even early 90s, I don't think freshman today should be expected to outperform freshman of the last 15-20 years by any real margin.  Simply put, the vast majority of players don't exit early.  The number who do are spread evenly enough around so that it's unlikely any player/team will spend much of the year playing teams left undermanned by early departures, and especially early departures at positions that will have a greater impact on a player's numbers.

[LarBrd33]

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.

[Celtics18]

I'm with Nick on this one.  I've been saying the same thing.  I'm sure this draft will be very, very good, but the hype was getting away from itself.

I think that many folks were actually starting to believe that as long as you got in the top seven, you would be almost guaranteed to get a franchise changing superstar.  I don't find that to be very likely. 

[Moranis]

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.