When have you been less excited for the start of a Blazers season?

All The No. 1 Overall NBA Draft Picks Who Won A ...Fadeaway Worldhttps://fadeawayworld.net › NBA News & Analysis

 

The goal of tanking is obviously to get a generational talent. But that's not where it ends. On average you are going to get a better player in the draft by drafting higher than lower. If you are a young teem it behoves you to draft higher because that is an opportunity that you will never have again with this young group. You have to strike while the iron's hot if you want to maximize the potential of your team.

Just getting the number one pick isn't enough. You have to surround that player with talent. If you're picking higher in the draft you're going to surround that player with better talent than if you are picking lower in the draft.

If you are using middle-aged players to win games that your younger players wouldn't use you are hurting your future actively by putting less talent on the roster that you intend to compete with.

It is not get "generational player or number one pick or bust". Even if you don't get those players you are still getting better talent than if you had middle-aged players winning you games that your younger players wouldn't have won.

Keeping those middle-aged players is actively hurting your team's future.

 

Nobody is arguing #1 or bust. Nobody is saying we have to get a #1 or #2. Or that we should tank perpetually until we do.

 

Very few won one with the team that drafted them.

 

Then I don't know why you're arguing because nobody is arguing to do what you were arguing against.

Players can have one leg longer than the other and have a long career. Most people have one leg longer than the other. You get orthotics to adjust for it if it causes you too many problems.

For example, Usain Bolt's running gait is asymmetrical due to scoliosis, which has resulted in his left leg being longer than his right leg.

Bill Rodgers, the famous marathoner who won the Boston and New York City marathons multiple times; he has one leg that is shorter than the other by about half an inch.

You just can't know how it'll turn out. To best maximize your odds of success you need to do it multiple times consecutively.

This is the argument for moving off of the middle-aged players that will win us games we don't care about, thereby hurting our draft lottery odds.

 

But most of them who were traded brought back value to the team that drafted them.

That's the point. That draft pick is a valuable asset. It's more valuable the closer to #1 that it is.

 

Nope. If that it had been the case that one leg was substantially longer then the other (& I'm not aware of any credible report that this is actually so) then it would have been spoken of prior to the draft everywhere including here and it just wasn't. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that individual teams may have had such information (or suspicions) internally as they have much more insider intel and medical experts, but it absolutely was not the case that this was being spoken of prior to the draft. The first I started hearing this rumor was after Oden's first major injury as a PTB

What I do recall from the lead up to that draft was a poll from unnamed front office people from around the league overwhelmingly saying that they'd choose Oden over KD

Sorry, but I can't help you understand basic math/odds. Yes there are exceptions to most rules, but franchises tank for very obvious reasons. Teams have better chances of landing better players if they get to select from all the players not just whats left. Sure some guys are late bloomers or slip through the cracks & good scouting absolutely matters but in general your point is ridiculous

STOMP

 

A good many of those trades didn't make those teams contenders.

 

Most trades don't. Most single drafts or acquisitions don't make teams contenders.

Just like Dame didn't make us a contender.

But nobody is saying a single draft, player, or trade is going to make us contenders.

What most contenders have in common is that they have more top to bottom talent than the teams who aren't contenders.

Portland doesn't have great ownership. We don't have proven management. We aren't a destination city. We don't have a great coaching staff. The argument could be pretty easily made that we're below average in all of those categories.

We do have a well respected draft analyst. That's about it.

Shouldn't we maximize the ability and impact of our only perceived strength? Anything else seems like insanity to me.

 

I’m not sure if you read it the first time, but I said I’m done in any actual discussions with you, it’s a complete waste of time imo.

It's getting quite odd now, I was replying to someone else, not you, thanks

 

You're replying in a public forum. That means it's a community discussion.

If you want to have a private conversation the forum offers the ability to directly message whoever you like and nobody else can see.

I would suggest you take advantage of that feature if you want a private conversation so we won't be forced to deal with you crying like a little girl.

 

I think @SharpesTriumph new exactly what he or she was thinking when creating this thread. Lol.

 

I would suggest you don't live on this forum and feel the need to post 24/7 like you do nothing else but sit on this forum all day.

It's funny I don't even have to say much and you get riled up like a 'crying little girl'. Move along bro, no body has time for you childishness.

 

Lol. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings.

I'll be nice.

 

I hadn't noticed this. They are separate posters! I learn something useful every day.

Didn't know this either. Who are you?

 

BlazerBender

 

I remember that name. But your individual personality never registered with me. I just remember the name. You have Sharper opinions now. Oh I just got it. You must live in Bend.

 

Do you remember "The Stipulation"? BendBlazer was tough to like but Stip at least had a decent side and actually liked the Blazers.

 

Odds of drafting an NBA All-Star at different draft positions:

Top Picks

• 1st overall pick: 65.33% chance of becoming an All-Star
• 2nd overall pick: 42.67% chance
• 3rd overall pick: 45.33% chance
• 4th overall pick: 34.21% chance

Lottery Picks (1-14)

• Overall, lottery picks (1-14) have a 28.3% chance of becoming an All-Star

Later First Round

• Picks 15-30 have an 8.2% chance of becoming an All-Star

Second Round

• Second round picks have a 2.6% chance of becoming an All-Star

If your best internal capability is scouting and judging how successful draft picks will be, it is clear that your best opportunity to find success is to draft as high as possible.