uh This poll is closed. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
embiid | 41 | 32.28% | |
wiggins | 86 | 67.72% | |
Total: | 127 votes |
|
thegoonofaudio posted:I don't believe in the rigging stuff but maybe they should have rules in place to prevent stuff like this (though it's not gonna happen, a lot of people like the randomness), like if your draft pick was top 3 you can't have a top 3 pick the next year (even if your top 3 pick the previous year wasn't yours but was traded to another team). Just a speculation not saying it's a good idea at all, just an idea. There's just so many injustices lol. It's probably never going to happen again, so who cares
|
# ? May 21, 2014 21:52 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 11:24 |
|
thegoonofaudio posted:I don't believe in the rigging stuff but maybe they should have rules in place to prevent stuff like this (though it's not gonna happen, a lot of people like the randomness), like if your draft pick was top 3 you can't have a top 3 pick the next year (even if your top 3 pick the previous year wasn't yours but was traded to another team). Just a speculation not saying it's a good idea at all just an idea. There's just so many injustices lol. Last time a team got the #1 two years in a row, they made significant changes to how the lottery worked, so its not unprecedented
|
# ? May 21, 2014 21:52 |
|
MourningView posted:And they should be held to a higher standard when it comes to overlooking Drummond that Average Internet Fan This isn't fair, because then you also have to poo poo on other teams for not doing more to trade up to take Drummond. Drummond had HUGE red flags as a prospect, and I don't think anyone, pro or amateur, ranked him that high. Barnes would have been the "right" pick but I'm not too sure Waiters is that huge of a step down. I will agree Bennett isn't a historic bust because of how bad the alternatives were, but it was a bad pick and shouldn't be defended.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 21:52 |
|
You're not preventing tanking though, you're just not allowing a team to be lucky. No one's hollering that Cleveland is now gaining an unfair advantage, because you still have to develop players and play the games. Which they are not so great at.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 21:53 |
|
morestuff posted:It's probably never going to happen again, so who cares Just you watch hahaha, next year Cavs are gonna get the first pick again, book it.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 21:54 |
|
Icy Penguigo posted:I don't care what reasoning they have to draft someone, if the pick turned out OK in retrospect than it's a dumb thing to be mad about. Generally, if a person makes bad decisions, bad results will happen even if it manages to work out for them every once in awhile. Which explains how Cleveland got to where it is at.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 21:55 |
|
Icy Penguigo posted:The 6 picks after him were Jonas V, who looks like he'll be great but was no guarantee to come over
|
# ? May 21, 2014 21:56 |
|
The Glumslinger posted:Last time a team got the #1 two years in a row, they made significant changes to how the lottery worked, so its not unprecedented Exactly, I'm glad my idea wasn't entirely random but has a bit of basis in historical rule changes.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 21:58 |
|
INSPECTAH DECK posted:No one ever seriously thought that Jonas wouldn't come over, everyone just knew it would take a year. Yeah, everyone knew he was coming over. Before the draft, everyone expected Cleveland to take him, but there was some concern about them not wanting to wait a year
|
# ? May 21, 2014 21:58 |
|
Icy Penguigo posted:I didn't say Bennett was mediocre, I said he was historically bad. You should probably reread my post. What I said was only one player picked in the first 7 was mediocre (the rest were horrible or didn't play.) Oladipo "for example" was the ONLY player worthy of consideration, and it's really easy to say that in hindsight. For the record, I thought they should have drafted Oladipo at the time, but that doesn't mean I think they're blundering morons for not predicting which top prospect would have a good year when so many of them have been busts (so far.) That isn't hindsight though! He was being projected above Bennett prior to the draft, with plenty of people saying he should be the number 1 pick. If he had gone first you would not have had people audibly gasping on national television because they were so stunned by the pick. This isn't like saying Michael Redd should have gone first in 2000 or something. And there are other players who, even if not especially good, were better than Bennett was. MourningView fucked around with this message at 22:13 on May 21, 2014 |
# ? May 21, 2014 22:10 |
|
TheGreyGhost posted:I know the popular SAS hivemind thing is "lol cavs gonna gently caress up" but we do have a new GM finally who isn't Chris Grant or Danny Ferry. He did the Hawes trade which has worked out fairly well all things considered, and I'm pretty sure the entire town would riot if he traded that pick at this point since everyone wants Wiggins or Embiid based on what I'm reading. I think Wiggins would do more just because he's a more complete player right now and can be a perimeter defender for a team that sorely needs one. It's not the "hive mind." It's that the only time the Cavs have ever made a correct draft pick in my life time was Lebron James.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 22:33 |
|
Rick posted:It's not the "hive mind." Kyrie Irving; not a correct draft pick.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 22:35 |
|
Rick posted:It's not the "hive mind." Kyrie Irving was probably the correct pick too.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 22:35 |
|
TheGreyGhost posted:He did the Hawes trade which has worked out fairly well all things considered Wait, since when is trading two second round picks in a loaded draft for a half-season rental of Spencer Hawes considered good?
|
# ? May 21, 2014 22:40 |
|
IcePhoenix posted:Kyrie Irving was probably the correct pick too. Congrats Cavs, two correct picks in 30 years.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 23:21 |
|
MourningView posted:I don't think it'd be that bad. Embiid has show flashes of being able to operate from the high post. I kinda agree that it could work, but not on the Sixers with MCW at point and how bad a shooter he is right now. It'd be like a worse version of the Grizzlies offense. Miko posted:Don't have to play em at the same time, then. I do think Embiid can play farther from the basket, which would help, but I think being able to operate through those two would take priority over whatever guard you might try to use to penetrate. You aren't going to take them and then not play them at the same time.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 23:21 |
|
Rick posted:It's not the "hive mind." Anthony Bennett is retroactively not a bad pick now because if they had been even slightly better, they wouldn't have the #1 this year.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 23:24 |
|
Jota posted:I kinda agree that it could work, but not on the Sixers with MCW at point and how bad a shooter he is right now. It'd be like a worse version of the Grizzlies offense. That is true, I forgot they have literally no shooters. But maybe Embiid and then like Stauskas or something.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 23:27 |
|
If Hinkie takes after his old boss he's going to draft without a whit of concern for need and fit, which, considering the Cavs, is probably the right approach.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 23:31 |
|
MourningView posted:That is true, I forgot they have literally no shooters. But maybe Embiid and then like Stauskas or something. If #3 is Embiid or Parker, I'd want James Young or Rodney Hood before Stauskas.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 23:34 |
|
Redgrendel2001 posted:If #3 is Embiid or Parker, I'd want James Young or Rodney Hood before Stauskas. He's a way better shooter than Young, and Hood might actually be more one dimensional.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 23:35 |
|
MourningView posted:He's a way better shooter than Young, and Hood might actually be more one dimensional. I'm not sure how big that discrepancy will be in the NBA , although Stauskas did have a nice vert measurement at the combine. I'm kind of the same opinion about Hood, but he surprised me with his athleticism during the tournament. Redgrendel2001 fucked around with this message at 23:49 on May 21, 2014 |
# ? May 21, 2014 23:45 |
|
Redgrendel2001 posted:I'm not sure how big that discrepancy will be in the NBA , although Stauskas did have a nice vert measurement at the combine. I'm kind of the same opinion about Hood, but he surprised me with his athleticism during the tournament. Stauskas is a better ball handler/passer than Hood was. The Michigan offense ran through him a lot and he was good at running the pick and roll. Hood was pretty much just a shooter. Neither played a whole ton of defense, although I guess Hood probably has the higher ceiling there. Young was mostly a shooter too and was good but not great at it, but that was a weird team so who knows.
|
# ? May 21, 2014 23:52 |
|
I can't imagine the Cavs will have the balls to draft Embiid with no medical records, especially with the spectre of Bennett hanging over them. It has to be Wiggins, which I think is the right pick anyway.
Cigar Aficionado fucked around with this message at 02:28 on May 22, 2014 |
# ? May 22, 2014 02:25 |
|
If I was the Cavs I'd re-sign Deng, waive Varejao (team option 9.8m next season I think) because I hate his injured ankles and his awful hair, draft Embiid, and then either rip off my Cavs disguise and truck up to Milwaukee to begin my new life rooting for the Wiggins/Giannis/Henson/Sanders Young Bucks (We're Bucks Fans Now), or I could wait a few years, demand a trade and move to Miami like any reasonably intelligent person. If I were Deng I'd never ever re-sign with the Cavs and they're probably going to have a big space at SF huh? Great White Hope posted:something painful that greatly reduces our quality of life, to the point where basic tasks like walking become a chore at best. Stop being happy ever. ooo I already have that and basketball brings me all kinds happiness I think you've got a circular problem there.
|
# ? May 22, 2014 02:28 |
|
Cigar Aficionado posted:I can't imagine the Cavs will have the balls to draft Embiid with no medical records, especially with the spectre of Bennett hanging over them. It has to be Wiggins, which I think is the right pick anyway. It doesn't have to be Wiggins, it could also be Parker who would be really easy to rationalize for the Cavs
|
# ? May 22, 2014 02:43 |
|
The Bucks don't have anyone who can score on the roster, but they also need whoever is going to turn out to be the best player.
|
# ? May 22, 2014 03:07 |
|
It would be cheaper to draft Wiggins and pay Varejao than draft Embiid and paying Deng. Better? I dunno.
|
# ? May 22, 2014 03:39 |
|
I wouldn't be surprised to see Embiid fall to 3rd if the back panic starts in earnest, but no further. I'd love for him not to have to fall to the Bucks, who might take a while to get it together on the management level anyway.
|
# ? May 22, 2014 07:10 |
|
Big Dog did a lot for that Milwaukee team, but it certainly felt like losing the lottery when it meant missing on Hill and Kidd. Let's not repeat that, Milwaukee!
|
# ? May 22, 2014 07:20 |
|
MourningView posted:That, Bennett, Thompson. It's a proud history. Bennett, yes. Waiters, absolutely, but Thompson? Who could they have gotten at 4 that was better than him? Looking at the draft that year they actually made the correct call on that one. Valanciunas is debatable and Klay was never in the discussions at #4.
|
# ? May 22, 2014 13:56 |
|
Kirios posted:Bennett, yes. Waiters, absolutely, but Thompson? Who could they have gotten at 4 that was better than him? Looking at the draft that year they actually made the correct call on that one. Valanciunas is debatable and Klay was never in the discussions at #4. It's not as bad as it looked at the time, but I'd rather have Valanciunas. Klay would have been a huge reach at the time, but Thompson was too.
|
# ? May 22, 2014 14:52 |
|
Blinkman987 posted:Big Dog did a lot for that Milwaukee team, but it certainly felt like losing the lottery when it meant missing on Hill and Kidd. Let's not repeat that, Milwaukee! I don't think any of the three players were vastly better than the other in their prime, peak Robinson in Milwaukee shouldered an enormous scoring load for those teams and was a legit all-star multiple times -- it's just that Hill and Kidd had whole entire memorable second careers from age 30-40 whereas Robinson faded away rapidly. Not to mention that if any of them had been drafted by Milwaukee in lieu of Robinson, they probably would have followed similar arcs and either left via trade or free agency or crippling injury. Grant Hill's career really is the saddest goddamn thing in the world to look at on Basketball Reference. He basically never once played meaningful playoff basketball in his entire career, and his best ever post-season set was probably putting up a ridiculous 29 PER in a 5-game loss to the Atlanta Hawks in the first round in 1999 (maybe the most amazing individual performance ever in a sad crippling defeat to the Hawks). Jason Kidd didn't win a ring until his 15th trip to the playoffs, which at that point is basically law of averages.
|
# ? May 22, 2014 15:22 |
|
Dante Exum is a tall point guard that can play passing lanes but can't shoot. What sets him apart from MCW right now?
|
# ? May 22, 2014 15:22 |
|
Sixers need shooters. Bad. Can't see Exum or Embiid.
|
# ? May 22, 2014 15:24 |
|
Where do you guys see that he can't shoot? Shooting isn't a plus for him, but he's not horrific like MCW
|
# ? May 22, 2014 15:30 |
|
mynameisjohn posted:Where do you guys see that he can't shoot? Shooting isn't a plus for him, but he's not horrific like MCW By most accounts it's pretty bad. Probably better than MCW, but bad enough that it's an issue for him as a prospect. And come on, it's not like you've seen him play either. Libertine posted:I don't think any of the three players were vastly better than the other in their prime Seriously? When Hill was healthy he was one of the best all around players in the league, and Kidd was the best in the league at his position for like a decade. Robinson was a good but not great scorer who didn't do a whole lot else. He wasn't a bad player or anything but both those guys were better, and it's not just because they played longer. And Robinson wasn't carrying the whole load for those teams. Vin Baker was really good in Milwaukee (better than Robinson, probably), and later Robinson was the second option behind Ray Allen, with Cassell also there to help shoulder the load. MourningView fucked around with this message at 16:00 on May 22, 2014 |
# ? May 22, 2014 15:47 |
|
MourningView posted:By most accounts it's pretty bad. Probably better than MCW, but bad enough that it's an issue for him as a prospect. And come on, it's not like you've seen him play either.
|
# ? May 22, 2014 15:52 |
|
MourningView posted:
How dare you forget Tim Thomas
|
# ? May 22, 2014 15:59 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 11:24 |
|
My big fear if the Bucks pick Parker is that he is Big Dog redux. A great college scorer who becomes a good NBA scorer but limited by athleticism which affects developing any other skills.
|
# ? May 22, 2014 16:01 |