Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th seed

[blue9]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Based on this historical data, I think the notion that the best way a small market team can win a ring is to deliberately suck and hope to build through high lottery picks is incorrect. The data just does not support that hypotheses.

Interesting data, but not all that surprising. I mean, when you take into account that only - what, 8? - teams have won championships in the past 30 years it really kinda takes the wind out of those sails. Also, when you consider that some teams have been poorly run for decades on end it should come as no surprise that, despite having high draft picks, they aren't able to turn their fortunes around - some of the best young talent goes to teams that are incapable of fielding a competitive team (from Owner down through the Bench).
So I think it's a bit disingenuous to use this data to refute the idea that a team can build through the draft. As long as you have a competent front office, higher draft picks (not necessarily the #1) will go further in helping you build a competitive team - especially when the team is in a small market and can't rely on landing top tier free agents. Maybe those draft picks won't directly lead you to a championship, but they give you more value to make better moves down the road.

 

[PapaG]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Interesting data, but not all that surprising. I mean, when you take into account that only - what, 8? - teams have won championships in the past 30 years it really kinda takes the wind out of those sails. Also, when you consider that some teams have been poorly run for decades on end it should come as no surprise that, despite having high draft picks, they aren't able to turn their fortunes around - some of the best young talent goes to teams that are incapable of fielding a competitive team (from Owner down through the Bench).
So I think it's a bit disingenuous to use this data to refute the idea that a team can build through the draft. As long as you have a competent front office, higher draft picks (not necessarily the #1) will go further in helping you build a competitive team - especially when the team is in a small market and can't rely on landing top tier free agents. Maybe those draft picks won't directly lead you to a championship, but they give you more value to make better moves down the road.

You can build through the draft. The point seems to me to be that getting high lottery picks doesn't guarantee success, and looking at teams like Indy and San Antonio, that drafting the right players, regardless of where you pick, is more important. Sure, Duncan was a #1 pick, but Parker was late first-round, and Ginobli was 2nd-round and didn't come over right away to the NBA.

Trading All-Stars for scrubs and draft picks doesn't guarantee anything other than you need to immediately replace an All-Star.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Interesting data, but not all that surprising. I mean, when you take into account that only - what, 8? - teams have won championships in the past 30 years it really kinda takes the wind out of those sails. Also, when you consider that some teams have been poorly run for decades on end it should come as no surprise that, despite having high draft picks, they aren't able to turn their fortunes around - some of the best young talent goes to teams that are incapable of fielding a competitive team (from Owner down through the Bench).
So I think it's a bit disingenuous to use this data to refute the idea that a team can build through the draft. As long as you have a competent front office, higher draft picks (not necessarily the #1) will go further in helping you build a competitive team - especially when the team is in a small market and can't rely on landing top tier free agents. Maybe those draft picks won't directly lead you to a championship, but they give you more value to make better moves down the road.

I agree with PapaG on this one. We already have two, really, really good players that were acquired with high lottery picks. One is a multiple time all star in his prime (just turned 28) and the other just won rookie of the year. What's the point of trading your best player for more lottery picks in the hope that you may get someone who will turn out as good several years down the road? Giving away your best player for scrubs and future lottery picks seems like several steps backwards with the hope that after 3 or 4 more years of losing you may get back to where you are now. I know the goal is to get better - long term, but there is no guarantee and the data shows the opposite is more likely true, for a variety of reasons (poor drafting, bad luck, injuries, etc.). So, if we capitulate and trade Aldridge, go into total tank mode for the next 3 or 4 years, at that point Lillard will probably grow tired of the losing and we'll be looking at once again losing our best player and starting over.

I think the whole losing deliberately to get better strategy is a complete fallacy. History shows it rarely, if ever works.

I really believe we have what it takes to make the playoffs this year. Last year, in spite of no interior defense and the worst bench in the entire history of the NBA, we were 3 games under .500 and still in the running for the 8th seed with a month to go in the season. Our GM has addressed our biggest weaknesses, we now have a legitimate 7' NBA starting center who will vastly improve our interior defense and our bench will be WAY better. Our GM did a good job of infusing our bench with a combination of veterans (Wright and Watson) and young talent (Robinson, McCollum). Plus, 6 of the guys (Lillard, Leonard, Freeland, Claver, Barton and Robinson) who will likely be in our top 10 in minutes were rookies last season. They are bound to show some improvement.

At the very least, we need to let this team play half a season together to see where they are at and what we are missing. To me, it makes ZERO sense to trade Aldridge now. He's under contract for two more full seasons. I think if we are winning more games than we are losing, and make the playoffs, that will be enough forward progress to keep him from demanding a trade for at least another year. The goal should be to get better, year by year. Winning and getting better is enough to keep most players happy.

BNM

 

[Mediocre Man]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

You can build through the draft. The point seems to me to be that getting high lottery picks doesn't guarantee success, and looking at teams like Indy and San Antonio, that drafting the right players, regardless of where you pick, is more important. Sure, Duncan was a #1 pick, but Parker was late first-round, and Ginobli was 2nd-round and didn't come over right away to the NBA.

Trading All-Stars for scrubs and draft picks doesn't guarantee anything other than you need to immediately replace an All-Star.

Question for you. which team has a better chance of winning

Aldridge, Parker and Ginobili

or

Duncan, Lillard, Batum

Star players win in this league, and the chances of getting one in the top 5 is much greater than getting in the bottom 5

It's not 100%, as teams like Indiana, and the Kings have demonstrated, but it's close.

of the list, that was provided, most of those players made their teams a lot better. It's not their fault that management couldn't complete the build, or they were injured.

 

[crandc]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

BNM, S2 won't let me rep you again. But I love data. I'm a data geek. Thanks for posting.

 

[KingSpeed]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

If BNM post is correct, that means since 1998-2012, which is the last 15 years of draft picks, there has been ONE top 5 pick that won a title with the team that drafted him. One out of the last 75. That is barely over a 1% probability. That is stunning, possibly the best stats I've ever seen to confirm my feelings that tanking is in general a poor strategy. I thought tanking was better than that, maybe even I had been overvaluing its effectiveness.

I've been saying this for the last couple years. The only top 3 pick (meaning you won the lottery) since Duncan (drafted in 1997) to win a title with the team that drafted him is Darko Milicic. That is it. So glad that people are finally paying attention to this.

 

[KingSpeed]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Actually, I did the research and posted the results in another thread two months ago on May 31.

Even though I knew about Wade, he was the first one that came into my mind, I inadvertently neglected to include him in the tabulated results. Here are those results corrected to include Wade:

How many top 5 picks taken since 1997 (the year Duncan was drafted) have won championships (or better still, how many have been the best player on a championship team)?

Here's the top 5 draft picks over the last 15 years:

1st Pick:
2012 Anthony Davis
2011 Kyrie Irving
2010 John Wall
2009 Blake Griffin
2008 Derrick Rose
2007 Greg Oden
2006 Andrea Bargnani
2005 Andrew Bogut
2004 Dwight Howard
2003 Lebron James
2002 Yao Ming
2001 Kwame Brown
2000 Kenyon Martin
1999 Elton Brand
1998 Michael Olowokandi

2nd Pick:
2012 Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
2011 Derrick Williams
2010 Evan Turner
2009 Hasheem Thabeet
2008 Michael Beasley
2007 Kevin Durant
2006 LaMarcus Aldridge
2005 Marvin Williams
2004 Emeka Okafor
2003 Darko Milicic
2002 Jay Williams
2001 Tyson Chandler
2000 Stromile Swift
1999 Steve Francis
1998 Mike Bibby

3rd Pick:
2012 Bradley Beal
2011 Enes Kanter
2010 Derrick Favors
2009 James Harden
2008 O.J. Mayo
2007 Al Horford
2006 Adam Morrison
2005 Deron Williams
2004 Ben Gordon
2003 Carmelo Anthony
2002 Mike Dunleavy
2001 Pau Gasol
2000 Darius Miles
1999 Baron Davis
1998 Raef LaFrentz

4th Pick:
2012 Dion Waiters
2011 Tristan Thompson
2010 Wesley Johnson
2009 Tyreke Evans
2008 Russell Westbrook
2007 Mike Conley
2006 Tyrus Thomas
2005 Chris Paul
2004 Shaun Livingston
2003 Chris Bosh
2002 Drew Gooden
2001 Eddy Curry
2000 Marcus Fizer
1999 Lamar Odom
1998 Antawn Jamison

5th Pick:
2012 Thomas Robinson
2011 Jonas Valanciunas
2010 DeMarcus Cousins
2009 Ricky Rubio
2008 Kevin Love
2007 Jeff Green
2006 Shelden Williams
2005 Raymond Felton
2004 Devin Harris
2003 Dwyane Wade
2002 Nickoloz Tskitishvili
2001 Jason Richardson
2000 Mike Miller
1999 Jonathan Bender
1998 Vince Carter

That's really quite shocking. In the last 15 drafts, one No. 1 pick, one No. 2 pick, two No. 3 picks, two No. 4 picks and two No. 5 picks have won an NBA championship, and of those, only LeBron and Wade (the first time) were the best players on their championship teams. In fact, Wade is the only player drafted top 5 in the last 15 years has won a championship for the team that drafted him. And, of the 8 total top five picks that have won rings, 4 of them (LeBron, Wade, Bosh and Mike Miller) had to combine forces to get their rings. Still think years of suckage and high lottery picks is the best way to win an NBA title?

P.S. What's really scary is Adam Morrison is the last top 5 pick to win a championship - as a seldom used scrub for a team that didn't draft him.

BTW, even if you go back 20 or 25 years, it only gets marginally better with guys like Shaq (not with the team that drafted him) and David Robinson that won rings. You really need to go back to the late 70s and early 80s before you see a significant number of top 5 draft picks (Hakeem, Jordan, Magic, Worthy, etc.) that won rings with the teams that drafted them. Of course, player movement as MUCH less common back then. The top players tended to play all, or at least most, of their careers with the team that drafted them.

Based on this historical data, I think the notion that the best way a small market team can win a ring is to deliberately suck and hope to build through high lottery picks is incorrect. The data just does not support that hypotheses.

BNM

You forgot Darko.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Duncan has won titles with the spurs.

 

[KingSpeed]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Duncan has won titles with the spurs.

Everyone knows that. The point is that SINCE DUNCAN, who was drafted 16 years ago, only 1 top 3 pick has won a title for the team that drafted him. Darko Milicic. That is it. 1 out of 48. And he was just a bench warmer.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Everyone knows that. The point is that SINCE DUNCAN, who was drafted 16 years ago, only 1 top 3 pick has won a title for the team that drafted him. Darko Milicic. That is it. 1 out of 48. And he was just a bench warmer.

The crappy teams tend to get those picks, while the teams with Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe have hogged a lot of the titles.

 

[e_blazer]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Interesting data, but not all that surprising. I mean, when you take into account that only - what, 8? - teams have won championships in the past 30 years it really kinda takes the wind out of those sails. Also, when you consider that some teams have been poorly run for decades on end it should come as no surprise that, despite having high draft picks, they aren't able to turn their fortunes around - some of the best young talent goes to teams that are incapable of fielding a competitive team (from Owner down through the Bench).
So I think it's a bit disingenuous to use this data to refute the idea that a team can build through the draft. As long as you have a competent front office, higher draft picks (not necessarily the #1) will go further in helping you build a competitive team - especially when the team is in a small market and can't rely on landing top tier free agents. Maybe those draft picks won't directly lead you to a championship, but they give you more value to make better moves down the road.

I don't think that there's doubt that you can build a competitive team through the draft, just that it's not the only, or even best way, to go about it. It's certainly not the panacea that some around here seem to think it is. NBA history shows that far more teams that frequent the lottery tend to stay in the lottery rather than becoming title contenders. Probably the best recent example of the kind of through-the-draft small market rebuild that you're talking about is OKC. In 2007 they drafted Durant, widely viewed as a one of those franchise-defining players who come along very infrequently, and then were able to draft a complementary All-Star level player the following year in Russell Westbrook. I think you'd have to agree those are some pretty fortunate lottery results and not ones likely to be replicated for every cellar-dwelling team. Now, five years after drafting Westbrook, the Thunder made the Finals once and likely would have gone there again if Westbrook hadn't been injured this year. They'll be looked upon as one of the favorites to come out of the West this year. But they're the shining example of the best case for a draft rebuild. Houston, the Clippers, the Grizzlies and the Warriors are all snapping at their heels and they are examples of what can be done by a team making trades and adding players through free agency to make the leap from the Blazers' level to contending status. And please don't bring up the tired old argument that the Blazers can never add a quality FA because they're a small market team. FA signings like Iguodala and Kevin Martin show that many players are looking for teams that are on the cusp of becoming contenders.

 

[KingSpeed]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

The crappy teams tend to get those picks, while the teams with Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe have hogged a lot of the titles.

Right, so A) trying to win the lottery is pointless and B) Shaq was drafted by Orlando who still has no titles and Kobe was drafted 13th. So it still stands. The top 3 pick almost never leads the team who drafted him to titles. And in 16 years of drafts, it's only happened once.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

In the last 25 years, here are the teams that played for the title, their respective star players who led them there, and where they were picked

89'
Lakers: Kareem (1), Magic (1), Worthy (1)
Pistons: Thomas (2), Dantley (6), Aguire (1), Dumars (18)

90'
Portland: Drexler (14), Porter (24), Williams (3)
Detroit: Thomas (2), Dantley (6), Aguire (1), Dumars (18)

91'
Lakers: Kareem (1), Magic (1), Worthy (1)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Grant (10)

92'
Blazers: Drexler (14), Porter (24), Williams (3)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Grant (10)

93'
Suns: Barkley(5), Majerle (14), Johnson (7)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Grant (10)

94'
Rockets: Olajuwan (1), Thorpe (9), Smith (6)
Knicks: Ewing (1), Oakley (9), Starks (ND)

95'
Rockets: Olajuwan (1), Drexler (14), Smith (6)
Magic: Shaq (1), Penny (3), Scott (4), Grant (10)

96'
Sonics: Payton (2), Kemp (17), Schrempf (8)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Kukoc (29)

97'
Jazz: Malone (13), Stockton (16)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Kukoc (29)

98'
Malone (13), Stockton (16)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Kukoc (29)

99'
Spurs: Duncan (1), Robinson (1), Elliott (3)
Knicks: Ewing (1), Houston (11), Johnson (1)

00'
Lakers: Shaq (1), Kobe (13), Rice (4)
Pacers: Rose (13), Miller (11), Smits (2)

01'
Lakers: Shaq (1), Kobe (13)
76ers: Iverson (1)

02'
Lakers: Shaq (1), Kobe (13)
Nets: Kidd (2), Vanhorn (2), Kittles (8)

03'
Spurs: Duncan (1), Parker (28), Robinson (1)
Nets: Kidd (2), Martin (1), Jefferson (13)

04'
Lakers: Shaq (1), Kobe (13), Payton (2)
Pistons: Hamilton (7), Billups (3), Wallace (4)

05'
Spurs: Duncan (1), Parker (28), Ginobili (57)
Pistons: Hamilton (7), Billups (3), Wallace (4)

06'
Mavs: Nowitzki (9), Terry (10), Stackhouse (3)
Heat: Shaq (1). Wade (5)

07'
Spurs: Duncan (1), Parker (28), Ginobili (57)
Cavs: James (1) Hughes (8), Ilgouskas (20)

08'
Lakers: Kobe (13), Gasol (3), Odom (4)
Celtics: Pierce (10), Garnett (5), Allen (5)

09'
Lakers: Kobe (13), Gasol (3), Odom (4)
Magic: Howard (1), Lewis (32), Hedo (16)

10'
Lakers: Kobe (13), Gasol (3), Bynum (10)
Celtics: Pierce (10), Garnett (5), Allen (5)

11'
Mavs: Nowitzki (9), Chandler (2), Kidd (2)
Heat: James (1), Wade (5), Bosh (4)

12'
Thunder: Durant (2), Westbrook (4) Harden (3)
Heat; James (1), Wade (5), Bosh (4)

13'
Spurs: Duncan (1), Parker (28), Ginobili (57)
Heat: James (1), Wade (5), Bosh (4)

Ok, that was way more work that it was worth, but if you look at the finals teams, and the players who were largely responsible for leading them there, you see a hell of a lot of low numbers. naming players that won for the team that drafted them isn't the story, IMO. Great teams are led by great players, period. Most great players are found in the top 5 of the draft.

 

[KingSpeed]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

In the last 25 years, here are the teams that played for the title, their respective star players who led them there, and where they were picked

89'
Lakers: Kareem (1), Magic (1), Worthy (1)
Pistons: Thomas (2), Dantley (6), Aguire (1), Dumars (18)

90'
Portland: Drexler (14), Porter (24), Williams (3)
Detroit: Thomas (2), Dantley (6), Aguire (1), Dumars (18)

91'
Lakers: Kareem (1), Magic (1), Worthy (1)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Grant (10)

92'
Blazers: Drexler (14), Porter (24), Williams (3)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Grant (10)

93'
Suns: Barkley(5), Majerle (14), Johnson (7)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Grant (10)

94'
Rockets: Olajuwan (1), Thorpe (9), Smith (6)
Knicks: Ewing (1), Oakley (9), Starks (ND)

95'
Rockets: Olajuwan (1), Drexler (14), Smith (6)
Magic: Shaq (1), Penny (3), Scott (4), Grant (10)

96'
Sonics: Payton (2), Kemp (17), Schrempf (8)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Kukoc (29)

97'
Jazz: Malone (13), Stockton (16)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Kukoc (29)

98'
Malone (13), Stockton (16)
Bulls: Jordan (3), Pippen (5), Kukoc (29)

99'
Spurs: Duncan (1), Robinson (1), Elliott (3)
Knicks: Ewing (1), Houston (11), Johnson (1)

00'
Lakers: Shaq (1), Kobe (13), Rice (4)
Pacers: Rose (13), Miller (11), Smits (2)

01'
Lakers: Shaq (1), Kobe (13)
76ers: Iverson (1)

02'
Lakers: Shaq (1), Kobe (13)
Nets: Kidd (2), Vanhorn (2), Kittles (8)

03'
Spurs: Duncan (1), Parker (28), Robinson (1)
Nets: Kidd (2), Martin (1), Jefferson (13)

04'
Lakers: Shaq (1), Kobe (13), Payton (2)
Pistons: Hamilton (7), Billups (3), Wallace (4)

05'
Spurs: Duncan (1), Parker (28), Ginobili (57)
Pistons: Hamilton (7), Billups (3), Wallace (4)

06'
Mavs: Nowitzki (9), Terry (10), Stackhouse (3)
Heat: Shaq (1). Wade (5)

07'
Spurs: Duncan (1), Parker (28), Ginobili (57)
Cavs: James (1) Hughes (8), Ilgouskas (20)

08'
Lakers: Kobe (13), Gasol (3), Odom (4)
Celtics: Pierce (10), Garnett (5), Allen (5)

09'
Lakers: Kobe (13), Gasol (3), Odom (4)
Magic: Howard (1), Lewis (32), Hedo (16)

10'
Lakers: Kobe (13), Gasol (3), Bynum (10)
Celtics: Pierce (10), Garnett (5), Allen (5)

11'
Mavs: Nowitzki (9), Chandler (2), Kidd (2)
Heat: James (1), Wade (5), Bosh (4)

12'
Thunder: Durant (2), Westbrook (4) Harden (3)
Heat; James (1), Wade (5), Bosh (4)

13'
Spurs: Duncan (1), Parker (28), Ginobili (57)
Heat: James (1), Wade (5), Bosh (4)

Ok, that was way more work that it was worth, but if you look at the finals teams, and the players who were largely responsible for leading them there, you see a hell of a lot of low numbers. naming players that won for the team that drafted them isn't the story, IMO. Great teams are led by great players, period. Most great players are found in the top 5 of the draft.

That was a waste of time, MM. So sorry. No one debates that the top picks win titles but in modern times, they don't do it for the TEAM THAT DRAFTED THEM. Orlando won Shaq, Cleveland won LeBron, Memphis won Pau, but Orlando and Cleveland and Memphis DON'T HAVE TITLES. Out of 48 picks in the last 16 drafts, only one has won the title for the team that drafted him. Darko.

 

[KingSpeed]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Back in the 80s and 90s, players didn't force trades like they do now nor did they switch teams as often.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

That was a waste of time, MM. Sorry. No one debates that the top picks win titles but in modern times, they don't do it for the TEAM THAT DRAFTED them. Orlando won Shaq, Cleveland won LeBron, but Orlando and Cleveland DON'T HAVE TITLES. Out of 48 picks in the last 16 drafts, only one has won the title for the team that drafted him. Darko.

It was not a waste of time. drafting the players is the key. That's the debate. You have to draft a great player and then be able to put players around him. If players left it's because of poor management.

 

[BBert]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

I think what mm is saying (maybe) is that (1) you need star players to win a title, (2) most if not all star players are drafted in the top 5 of the draft, and (3) how is Portland going to get one or more star players, if not through the draft? The choices are (1) free agency (never ever going to happen), (2) trade for one (in the modern collusion era, would a star even approve a trade here?), or (3) the draft.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Almost all those championship teams had key players (like Isaiah Thomas on the Pistons) drafted by and developed by their team.

Pippen/Jordan
Duncan
Wade
Nowitzki
Kobe
Pierce
Duncan
Stockton
Malone

etc.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Almost all those championship teams had key players (like Isaiah Thomas on the Pistons) drafted by and developed by their team.

Pippen/Jordan
Duncan
Wade
Nowitzki
Kobe
Pierce
Duncan
Stockton
Malone

etc.

Even Denny, who hates me, agrees.

 

[PapaG]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

The crappy teams tend to get those picks, while the teams with Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe have hogged a lot of the titles.

Yes, that's the point.

 

[PapaG]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

It was not a waste of time. drafting the players is the key. That's the debate. You have to draft a great player and then be able to put players around him. If players left it's because of poor management.

What is the point of drafting them when they move to another team before winning a title? I think you're missing the point, which is the teams that draft these 'superstars' in the Top 3 picks lose those players to larger markets/better title opportunity. It's a neat list you researched, but it doesn't address what is being debated, which is a team like Portland tanking to get a top pick after letting an All-Star PF go for projects and picks. History shows that approach doesn't work. Your own list shows this to be the case.

Orlando is just another team since Dwight Howard left. Cleveland is garbage without James.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Yes, that's the point.

Except two of Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe won multiple championships with the team that drafted them.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Hakeem vs. Ewing. Two #1 picks going head to head for the title for the teams that selected them.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

So let's look at unique players in the past 10 years. And we'll put them in order of where they were drafted

Shaq (1)
Duncan (1)
James (1)
Howard (1)
Chandler (2)
Kidd (2)
Durant (2)
Billups (3)
Stackhouse (3)
Gasol (3)
Harden (3)
Wallace (4)
Odom (4)
Bosh (4)
Westbrook (4)
Wade (5)
Garnett (5)
Allen (5)
Hamilton (7)
Hughes (8)
Nowitzki (9)
Terry (10)
Pierce (10)
Bynum (10)
Kobe (13)
Hedo (16)
Ilgouskas (20)
Parker (28)
Lewis (32)
Ginobili (57)
Wallace (UD)

18 top 5 picks, 7 other lottery picks, 3 late 1st, 2 2nds, and 1 undrafted (shouldn't leave Ben Wallace out).

Presently, our roster contains 2 top 5s, 3 other lottery picks, and 5 late 1sts. It's almost as though we already have players that might meet the basic criteria for comprising a good team.

 

[blue9]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

I think the whole losing deliberately to get better strategy is a complete fallacy. History shows it rarely, if ever works.

I know that some have advocated for tanking this season, but I haven't (yet). I just don't think that we'll be much worse after trading LMA - depending on the trade I think we'd end up slightly worse and potentially the same. The CHI trade, for example, would immediately replace LMA with Boozer. Now, from a player-value POV there's a huge drop-off. But from a W/L POV I think we come out about equal. Other trades (GS) may drop us a few spots in the short-term, but we certainly wouldn't be "losing deliberately".

 

[PapaG]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Almost all those championship teams had key players (like Isaiah Thomas on the Pistons) drafted by and developed by their team.

Pippen/Jordan - #5 pick/#3 pick
Duncan - #1 pick being used as the baseline for this discussion.
Wade - 5th pick
Nowitzki - 9th pick
Kobe - 13th pick
Pierce - 10th pick
Duncan - you already named him
Stockton - 16th pick
Malone - 13th pick

etc.

The Bulls built a dynasty drafting the best player of all-time at #3, and one of the best all-around players at #5. Duncan is the baseline. Other than that, you just proved that drafting mid-lotto or later, historically, is better for the team that drafts those players than drafting in the Top 3.

Wade didn't sniff a title until Shaq decided to go there, and the odds of an MVP-level player coming to Portland via FA are zero.

 

[PapaG]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Hakeem vs. Ewing. Two #1 picks going head to head for the title for the teams that selected them.

First of all, nobody is denying what happened 25 years ago, which is why Duncan and the lottery era are the baseline. Tanking made a bit more sense when you could be guaranteed the top pick, or a top two pick later, by being historically bad.

You are offering information that literally has nothing to do with the discussion of building through the draft in the recent past and present of the NBA.

 

[PapaG]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Except two of Shaq, Duncan, and Kobe won multiple championships with the team that drafted them.

Charlotte drafted Bryant, and he went 13th in that draft. Everybody concedes that Duncan is the exception in the modern NBA.

You are arguing a point that nobody is making. It's odd.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

The Bulls built a dynasty drafting the best player of all-time at #3, and one of the best all-around players at #5. Duncan is the baseline. Other than that, you just proved that drafting mid-lotto or later, historically, is better for the team that drafts those players than drafting in the Top 3.

Wade didn't sniff a title until Shaq decided to go there, and the odds of an MVP-level player coming to Portland via FA are zero.

Someone send a memo to Paul Allen that he should fold the team.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Blazers: Best offseason of all Westen Conference lottery teams, should be 7th see

Charlotte drafted Bryant, and he went 13th in that draft. Everybody concedes that Duncan is the exception in the modern NBA.

You are arguing a point that nobody is making. It's odd.

Awesome.

It sure is clear that few of those teams are built entirely via trades. Most have key players who played their first season with the team and never changed teams.