this thread is revisiting a debate that has been hashed over many times. while i understand the key points, previously, other posters have made the following points in response:
first, ainge is an above average drafter. his record shows that again and again. but no one, not even san antonio, bats close to .1000.
second, let's please be patient before deciding a player is a "bust." this rush to judgement smacks of the same impatience shown about bradley's first year as a celtic. it is too early to judge on rozier, by far.
third, since only one half of the players taken in the mid range of the draft ever become nba players, labeling someone a bust is an overreaction. the most common player from that range who makes it becomes a role or bench player. which is fine.
fourth, to say ainge should have picked player X misses the point that we all have 20/20 hindsight. portis went at #22 in the draft for a number of reasons.
many GMs had questions about portis based upon scouting reports. he was seen as a bench player with a limited ceiling. too weak to fight under the boards and not a shot blocker or defensive rebounder. that is, a nice player but not someone you draft in the top 12 spots or so.
final point, it is generally agreed that nba teams should draft the bpa, not based upon immediate need. what maybe a team need at the time of the draft can change in a year or two. meaning drafting upon need leaves the team with a lesser player and no pressing need in his position. the preferred strategy is to pick the bpa. sorting out any log jams becomes a good problem to have.
Topic: Danny Ainge Missed Again - Terry Rozier (Read 24884 times)