Durant offended that Portland didn't pick him?

[Fez Hammersticks]

What's made him this way is that he's still offended that Portland didn't pick him. He says he's not going to lie, he's imagined what his life would have been like playing with Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge. On the day of the 2007 draft, his agent told him the Trail Blazers were going to select Greg Oden first and the Seattle SuperSonics were going to pick him second, and he refused to believe it until David Stern broke the news on a microphone.

LINK​

 

[jlprk]

 

[EGame]

Can we have a 2007 draft rewind/do-over.

 

[Nikolokolus]

"Kevin will win scoring titles, Greg is going to win championships"

Those words will haunt me for years.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

Can we have a 2007 draft rewind/do-over.

No, you guys don't get it: what made him the way he is, was not getting picked by Portland. If he'd been the #1 pick, he'd still be a lazy chucker just like everyone thought he was his rookie year. He and Roy would have fought over captainship, and it'd be a huge mess right now. Just one big jumpshooting team that can't make it past the first round.

Oden, on the other hand, would never have played DDR that evening, never bumped knees with that fuckwad with the knee brace made of kryptonite, and would be leading OKC to a smashing of Memphis right now. And he'd be saying how his motivation was being picked #2.

It's not Portland, necessarily, but the #1 pick that's often cursed.

 

[Nikolokolus]

What really saved Durant was two things: First, they fired PJ Carlesimo as soon as humanly possible. Second, he never played for Nate.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Durant would have been awesome setting up in the corner and waiting for Brandon to kick the ball out to him as the shot clock wound down

 

[magnifier661]

No, you guys don't get it: what made him the way he is, was not getting picked by Portland. If he'd been the #1 pick, he'd still be a lazy chucker just like everyone thought he was his rookie year. He and Roy would have fought over captainship, and it'd be a huge mess right now. Just one big jumpshooting team that can't make it past the first round.

Oden, on the other hand, would never have played DDR that evening, never bumped knees with that fuckwad with the knee brace made of kryptonite, and would be leading OKC to a smashing of Memphis right now. And he'd be saying how his motivation was being picked #2.

It's not Portland, necessarily, but the #1 pick that's often cursed.

As much as I respect your posts, I really disagree with this statement. During the draft I agreed with you. I was heavily a pro Oden camp and thought we made the right decision. Hindsight is 20/20 so we can't really say that it wasn't a wrong choice. I mean everyone and their mother wanted Oden. The once in a decade franchise center was clearly the right choice.

I really thought Durant would be a "ball hog" type player; but watching him now and having to play with arguably one of the biggest ball hogs. He has proven that he can still get his; and doesn't complain when his point guard is taking 5-10 more shots than he is. I would love to have Durant right now.

 

[BlazerBeliever]

I don't blame Durant for being offended. Who doesn't want to be the number one pick.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

I still believe that the Sonics would still exist if they got Oden. The reason being he would have been such a "shoo in" for multiple championships (which he was at the time) that the seattle-ites would have never let the team leave.

 

[Natebishop3]

It just sucks because I remember one of the first things I thought when we won the lottery was that this seemed strangely like the Bowie/Jordan scenario, and that I was scared we might end up making the same mistake... but I also saw Oden as being a possible Shaq and how could we turn that down?

 

[Minstrel]

It just sucks because I remember one of the first things I thought when we won the lottery was that this seemed strangely like the Bowie/Jordan scenario, and that I was scared we might end up making the same mistake...

Fortunately, Portland didn't make the same mistake. The mistake Portland made in the Bowie/Jordan draft was taking the less talented player to try to fill a need. That's a very bad philosophy in drafting. You maximize talent and either try to get that talent to work together or else make trades to balance out the roster.

In the Oden/Durant draft, Portland took the best talent. They've just been unlucky with injury.

As for Durant being "offended" that Portland didn't pick him, my reaction is: Standard operating procedure. Most great players try to find some way to feel slighted or insulted to fuel them. Durant was in no way slighted, as he was a strong consideration for the top pick and went second in an extremely top-heavy draft. However, it's smart of him to convince himself that he was, in fact, shown disrespect...that seems to be a pretty good motivating tool to athletes. Jordan used it throughout his career.

 

[B-Roy]

Durant would have broke out last year with us.

 

[Natebishop3]

Fortunately, Portland didn't make the same mistake. The mistake Portland made in the Bowie/Jordan draft was taking the less talented player to try to fill a need. That's a very bad philosophy in drafting. You maximize talent and either try to get that talent to work together or else make trades to balance out the roster.

In the Oden/Durant draft, Portland took the best talent. They've just been unlucky with injury.

As for Durant being "offended" that Portland didn't pick him, my reaction is: Standard operating procedure. Most great players try to find some way to feel slighted or insulted to fuel them. Durant was in no way slighted, as he was a strong consideration for the top pick and went second in an extremely top-heavy draft. However, it's smart of him to convince himself that he was, in fact, shown disrespect...that seems to be a pretty good motivating tool to athletes. Jordan used it throughout his career.

I disagree. I think there was more than one mistake to make. Was Oden the more talented player? I think that's debatable. Oden might have had the more freakish athleticism, but did he have a more polished game than Durant? I'm not so sure. Also, there was no question that Durant had more drive than Oden did at that point, and that's where the comparison comes in. Jordan was extremely driven and determined to be great, and Durant has those same qualities. It's not like it was a secret before the draft. Even KP acknowledged that Durant was an "assassin" and was a "gym rat". We knew he was going to be great, we just figured Oden was going to be able to help us more. We were wrong.

 

[Minstrel]

I disagree. I think there was more than one mistake to make. Was Oden the more talented player? I think that's debatable. Oden might have had the more freakish athleticism, but did he have a more polished game than Durant? I'm not so sure. Also, there was no question that Durant had more drive than Oden did at that point, and that's where the comparison comes in. Jordan was extremely driven and determined to be great, and Durant has those same qualities. It's not like it was a secret before the draft. Even KP acknowledged that Durant was an "assassin" and was a "gym rat". We knew he was going to be great, we just figured Oden was going to be able to help us more. We were wrong.

Those would be great points if Oden had failed due to lack of desire or effort. His failure to be a superstar, so far, is nothing to do with that. In fact, all reports are that he's worked extremely hard all along...unfortunately, most of it has been rehab.

Whether Oden was the most talented is debatable, sure. It was not debatable that Jordan was more talented than Bowie, and that was the mistake made: taking the clearly less talented guy. Portland didn't do that with Oden. Most scouts tabbed Oden as a once-in-a-generation talent. Even if you considered Durant one, also, it's clear Portland didn't take a clearly less talented prospect.

The comparison to the Bowie/Jordan decision is easy, but extremely lazy. The facts of the two cases are completely different.

 

[jlprk]

It just sucks because I remember one of the first things I thought when we won the lottery was that this seemed strangely like the Bowie/Jordan scenario, and that I was scared we might end up making the same mistake... but I also saw Oden as being a possible Shaq and how could we turn that down?

You forget that before the draft, this same thought was across message boards and in some national articles.

The mistake Portland made in the Bowie/Jordan draft was taking the less talented player to try to fill a need. That's a very bad philosophy in drafting.

Unless there's a really big difference between the two choices when it's time to pick, or no difference in which positions are needed, GMs disagree.

It was not debatable that Jordan was more talented than Bowie, and that was the mistake made: taking the clearly less talented guy.

Not now, but it was very debatable then.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

 

[Minstrel]

Not now, but it was very debatable then.

No, it wasn't even debatable then. No one knew Jordan would be one of the greatest players ever, if not the greatest, but he was seen as probably the best player in college basketball and a phenomenal talent. Only Olajuwon was remotely in his class, talent-wise, for that draft. Bowie was a classic reach for a big man. He was a very good college player, but not in Jordan's class. The only reason the Bowie selection wasn't seen as stunning was because back then people still believed you couldn't build around a perimeter player. Even Thorn, the guy who drafted Jordan, said it after drafting him.

 

[jlprk]

No, it wasn't even debatable then. No one knew Jordan would be one of the greatest players ever, if not the greatest, but he was seen as probably the best player in college basketball and a phenomenal talent. Only Olajuwon was remotely in his class, talent-wise, for that draft. Bowie was a classic reach for a big man. He was a very good college player, but not in Jordan's class.

Hindsight. I saw various articles about Bowie and none about Jordan. If what you say is true, it was known only among insiders, because that opinion didn't make it to the media. What is your source?

There WAS doubt about Bowie due to his injury history, but the doubt wasn't due to Jordan being a sure thing to become the better player.

 

[Natebishop3]

Those would be great points if Oden had failed due to lack of desire or effort. His failure to be a superstar, so far, is nothing to do with that. In fact, all reports are that he's worked extremely hard all along...unfortunately, most of it has been rehab.

Whether Oden was the most talented is debatable, sure. It was not debatable that Jordan was more talented than Bowie, and that was the mistake made: taking the clearly less talented guy. Portland didn't do that with Oden. Most scouts tabbed Oden as a once-in-a-generation talent. Even if you considered Durant one, also, it's clear Portland didn't take a clearly less talented prospect.

The comparison to the Bowie/Jordan decision is easy, but extremely lazy. The facts of the two cases are completely different.

Greg might be working hard to rehab, but there's been much said about his lack of desire or killer instinct, even before we drafted him. He's just kind of a big, goofy, happy go lucky kind of guy. That's not the kind of attitude you want from your big man.

 

[Minstrel]

Hindsight. I saw various articles about Bowie and none about Jordan. If what you say is true, it was known only among insiders, because that opinion didn't make it to the media. What is your source?

It was the common sentiment at the time, something I've seen from many people, including reports from the time. Everyone, probably including the Trail Blazers, saw Jordan as the better talent...but many, certainly including the Trail Blazers, felt Bowie would have more "impact" due to his size. Something I've also seen Blazers officials of the time say was that they were looking for the "next Bill Walton." Walton had set the blueprint within the organization for a great center: someone who could pass and shoot and run despite being a center, and Bowie fit that.

The problem, of course, is that Walton was dominant in college and Bowie wasn't. Jordan was, as evidenced by the awards he won (two-time consensus first-team All American and four Player of the Year awards in the season before he went pro).

 

[Minstrel]

Greg might be working hard to rehab, but there's been much said about his lack of desire or killer instinct, even before we drafted him. He's just kind of a big, goofy, happy go lucky kind of guy. That's not the kind of attitude you want from your big man.

Which would only be relevant if lack of intensity or desire was the reason for his current lack of success. He's been a complete success when he's been on the court.

 

[Natebishop3]

Which would only be relevant if lack of intensity or desire was the reason for his current lack of success. He's been a complete success when he's been on the court.

I think he's had spurts of success while on the court, but I don't think he's been a "complete success" as you said, and definitely not numbers worthy of the #1 overall pick.

 

[Minstrel]

I think he's had spurts of success while on the court, but I don't think he's been a "complete success" as you said, and definitely not numbers worthy of the #1 overall pick.

Well, he's been a game-changer on defense, one of the league leaders in Rebound Rate and able to both draw double teams and score at a very high percentage. The only on-court problem he's had so far has been foul issues, which has lowered his raw per-game stats. I'd say that's a complete success for his level of NBA experience. Injuries are the only thing that have kept him from fulfilling his draft status. He's not Kwame Brown who was just a terrible player.

 

[RoyToy]

Oden and Durant were thought of as being in the same league when it comes to talent leading up to the draft. The main difference between the two though is that Oden was a C and Durant was a perimeter player, thus making Oden the pick. There was little doubt Durant was going to end up being at least a top 10 player.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

I was pro-Oden and looked at Oden as the better prospect UNTIL his combine physical came out. "His knees were that of a 30+ year old vet" said one exec after reviewing his MRI from their team doctors.

And then this article came out three months after that draft.

 

[jlprk]

It was the common sentiment at the time, something I've seen from many people, including reports from the time. Everyone, probably including the Trail Blazers, saw Jordan as the better talent...but many, certainly including the Trail Blazers, felt Bowie would have more "impact" due to his size. Something I've also seen Blazers officials of the time say was that they were looking for the "next Bill Walton." Walton had set the blueprint within the organization for a great center: someone who could pass and shoot and run despite being a center, and Bowie fit that.

Bowie over Jordan was the common sentiment, just like Oden over Durant was. If you read that Jordan was the better player, I'll speculate on what the writer meant. Jordan had the best post-Wooden college coach, so he knew defense better than Bowie. It can always be written that the 6-7 guy is a better player than the 7-1 guy, because he usually has a bigger repertoire of abilities and moves. But obviously, premium big men are drafted before smaller players unless a difference is obvious, and it wasn't from what I read.

You say Jordan was the sure thing; it was the opposite. Jordan was the risk and Bowie was the sure thing. Jordan (2 years in college) had recently emerged on the scene while with Bowie (5 years in college due to injuries), I had seen articles since he was a high school junior. Jordan stuff had been in the media a couple of months since March Madness; Bowie stuff for 7 years.

I suppose a great genius could have selected better, but for scouts using the usual methods with their ordinary intellects, I don't fault the Blazers for choosing Bowie over Jordan or Oden over Durant.

As for a writer saying Jordan was better due to winning an NCAA championship, Jordan shared in the glory, but Dean Smith won it. Jordan was just one of several near-equals on that team, while Bowie clearly led his team. Bowie was more dominant that Jordan because Bowie led his team, while Jordan shared the spotlight with teammates like Sam Perkins, Brad Daugherty, Kenny Smith, and Joe Wolf. Perkins won more awards than Jordan.

The problem, of course, is that Walton was dominant in college and Bowie wasn't. Jordan was, as evidenced by the awards he won (two-time consensus first-team All American and four Player of the Year awards in the season before he went pro).

"Four Player of the Year awards" in one season simply means he was Player of the Year for one year, suddenly gaining notice. Jordan was AP player of the year once, but Bowie had been AP All-American for two years. As for consensus, Bowie was All-American in 1981 and 1984; Jordan in 1983 and 1984.

http://www.hickoksports.com/history/mbaskallams.shtml

 

[PtldPlatypus]

http://www.bigbluehistory.net/bb/bowie.html

The article above of June 17, 1984 in the Chicago Tribune just prior to the draft is no longer on-line, so below are some excerpts:

"The Bulls' decision to select Jordan, a 6-foot-6-inch All-America guard with unlimited potential was dictated by their No. 3 position in the draft order. Lack of a dominating center is the major reason they have lost 111 games in the last two seasons, but there are only two can't miss pivotmen this time - and both will be gone by the time the Bulls make their choice."

 

[Minstrel]

You say Jordan was the sure thing

Where?

"Four Player of the Year awards" in one season simply means he was Player of the Year for one year, suddenly gaining notice.

Yes, it means he was clearly recognized as dominant by that season, as pretty much clearly the best player in college basketball, and then he turned pro.

Jordan was the most talented, Bowie was believed to have more impact at the NBA level because he was "big." This was known even at the time. I am in no way arguing that common sentiment was that the Blazers should draft Jordan, but common wisdom was flawed. The same common wisdom (size over talent) would lead to players like Shawn Bradley being drafted high in the draft.

 

[PapaG]

Which would only be relevant if lack of intensity or desire was the reason for his current lack of success. He's been a complete success when he's been on the court.

He can't stay on the court, when healthy, due to always being in foul trouble. This affects his success, and has hindered his impact even when he is healthy.