Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

B. C. biggest draft mistakes. Not Barg.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Nilanka wrote: View Post
    There was a lot of "nothing fazes this guy" talk about Bargnani's personality in 2006, implying that he's got the mental toughness of a Bobby Fischer.

    Who would've thought that any type of motivational technique, roster changes, positional changes, and coaching changes also don't faze him :|
    Woohaa, Bobby Fischer was a complete lunatic; if they thought he had anything mentally comparable to him they should have run far far away, it's definately a negative. Now if they thought he had the mental make-up of Kasparov or Lasker, that would have been something else.

    Comment


    • #47
      Something big is missing in this thread (if I didn't miss it). All talk about a pick being good or bad is with the assumption that the players develop irrespective of the context of the team that drafted him. Development and becoming a good player does not take place in a vacuum. It's very well possible that one of the good players that were drafted by the Thunder would not have developed the way he did on another team.

      Also, for those advocating to always draft BPA without regards of fit, it's pretty obvious to me, considering the type of players and positions they played, that the Thunder did consider fit as part of their process to decide who was the best player available.

      I think there are quite a few players picked high who ended up in a situation that was a bad fit and consequently didn't develop as well as they could have in another situation. Maybe some people (or a lot) see this differently but I don't have to go any further back than last year's number 2 pick, Derrick Williams, for an example of someone ending up in a bad situation to develop who might have done better elsewhere.

      Some teams are much better at developing players than others and some situations are much better for the development of a specific player than other situation. Simply looking back at a draft and deciding whether a certain pick was wrong or right based on how a player has developed years is way too simplistic. Context matters for how players turn out.

      Comment


      • #48
        Soft Euro wrote: View Post
        Something big is missing in this thread (if I didn't miss it). All talk about a pick being good or bad is with the assumption that the players develop irrespective of the context of the team that drafted him. Development and becoming a good player does not take place in a vacuum. It's very well possible that one of the good players that were drafted by the Thunder would not have developed the way he did on another team.

        Also, for those advocating to always draft BPA without regards of fit, it's pretty obvious to me, considering the type of players and positions they played, that the Thunder did consider fit as part of their process to decide who was the best player available.

        I think there are quite a few players picked high who ended up in a situation that was a bad fit and consequently didn't develop as well as they could have in another situation. Maybe some people (or a lot) see this differently but I don't have to go any further back than last year's number 2 pick, Derrick Williams, for an example of someone ending up in a bad situation to develop who might have done better elsewhere.

        Some teams are much better at developing players than others and some situations are much better for the development of a specific player than other situation. Simply looking back at a draft and deciding whether a certain pick was wrong or right based on how a player has developed years is way too simplistic. Context matters for how players turn out.
        Good point. Rondo is another guy I always think about in that regard, especially as he was a late 1st round pick (#21) in Bargnani's infamous 2006 draft. He had a less than stellar rookie season, playing behind Telfair on a bad Boston team. The next year, he became the starting PG with Boston's big-3 and he blossomed. Had he been drafted by a team that kept him as a backup PG for several seasons or by a bad team that rushed him into a starting role with exaggerated expectations headed on him, there's a strong liklihood that he wouldn't be the same player he is today.

        You're absolutely right that situation plays a key role in player development, which in turn plays a key role in determining the quality of the pick used to draft said player.

        Comment


        • #49
          CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
          Good point. Rondo is another guy I always think about in that regard, especially as he was a late 1st round pick (#21) in Bargnani's infamous 2006 draft. He had a less than stellar rookie season, playing behind Telfair on a bad Boston team. The next year, he became the starting PG with Boston's big-3 and he blossomed. Had he been drafted by a team that kept him as a backup PG for several seasons or by a bad team that rushed him into a starting role with exaggerated expectations headed on him, there's a strong liklihood that he wouldn't be the same player he is today.

          You're absolutely right that situation plays a key role in player development, which in turn plays a key role in determining the quality of the pick used to draft said player.
          Rondo is a great example. Suppose he was drafted by a team like our team last year, with barely any shooters around him to space the floor. Considering his own bad shot, what would have happened?

          Comment


          • #50
            Stahmenah_Vybz wrote: View Post
            I posted this twice by accident. can someone please delete the other post? Thank you very much and sorry about. Hard to do these things on a phone. ARG!
            How dare you!

            Comment


            • #51
              Tesla wrote: View Post
              How dare you!
              lol sorry. But you are kind of late with your response. haha

              Comment


              • #52
                Soft Euro wrote: View Post
                Something big is missing in this thread (if I didn't miss it). All talk about a pick being good or bad is with the assumption that the players develop irrespective of the context of the team that drafted him. Development and becoming a good player does not take place in a vacuum. It's very well possible that one of the good players that were drafted by the Thunder would not have developed the way he did on another team.

                Also, for those advocating to always draft BPA without regards of fit, it's pretty obvious to me, considering the type of players and positions they played, that the Thunder did consider fit as part of their process to decide who was the best player available.

                I think there are quite a few players picked high who ended up in a situation that was a bad fit and consequently didn't develop as well as they could have in another situation. Maybe some people (or a lot) see this differently but I don't have to go any further back than last year's number 2 pick, Derrick Williams, for an example of someone ending up in a bad situation to develop who might have done better elsewhere.

                Some teams are much better at developing players than others and some situations are much better for the development of a specific player than other situation. Simply looking back at a draft and deciding whether a certain pick was wrong or right based on how a player has developed years is way too simplistic. Context matters for how players turn out.
                Actually we can also use Kawhi Leonard as an example of right team at the right time. I remember him saying how much he loved Toronto, everyone passed on him and he help big time in the spurs run last year. Great contributor in my opinion.

                Comment


                • #53
                  planetmars wrote: View Post
                  Don't have insider access, so can't see the article, but drafting Bargnani was not a mistake. The mistake was not trading him.
                  Maybe,,, but for anyone who watched NCAA and saw the success progress and work ethic of LaMarcus Aldridge in Highschool and through to UTexas could project his as a quality big man... The real dilema of that draft was Brandon Roy v LaMarcus Aldridge... it would have been tragic to draft BRoy.
                  "I may be wrong ... but I doubt it"

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    charlz wrote: View Post
                    Maybe,,, but for anyone who watched NCAA and saw the success progress and work ethic of LaMarcus Aldridge in Highschool and through to UTexas could project his as a quality big man... The real dilema of that draft was Brandon Roy v LaMarcus Aldridge... it would have been tragic to draft BRoy.
                    Would it?
                    That dude was a superstar for 3 years. With him and bosh, we could've had a good run. Sure the ending would've been tragic but I'd rather have 3 awesome years from one of the classiest, most clutch players in the league than the alternative.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Letter N wrote: View Post
                      Would it?
                      That dude was a superstar for 3 years. With him and bosh, we could've had a good run. Sure the ending would've been tragic but I'd rather have 3 awesome years from one of the classiest, most clutch players in the league than the alternative.
                      good point because during the bROY years there was much jubilation in POR. My point is at the number one spot I would have deliberated between LaMarcus and Roy... But Colangelo had wood for Bargs and there was no deterring him... its evident because he keeps sticking with him.
                      "I may be wrong ... but I doubt it"

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        charlz wrote: View Post
                        good point because during the bROY years there was much jubilation in POR. My point is at the number one spot I would have deliberated between LaMarcus and Roy... But Colangelo had wood for Bargs and there was no deterring him... its evident because he keeps sticking with him.
                        What if Bryan and Andrea were really in love, that would be hilarious, if this were a movie it would be something like Brokeback mountain meets love and basketball, with phrases like nobody can understand our love, or I love you more than I love pasta said frequently

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X