2016 NBA Draft thread

[Ronin]

The Celtics are reportedly want Nerlens Noel in exchange for the No. 3 overall pick in the upcoming draft.
The 76ers are reportedly "pushing hard" to trade with the Celtics for the No. 3 overall pick so that they can draft Kris Dunn, and with Philly already expected to bring in Ben Simmons with the No. 1 overall selection, they may be more willing to part ways with Noel.

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nba/2112/nerlens-noel

 

[Chaplin]

Quite the opposite, you notice how neither Philly nor LA is trading their pick because of Simmons/Ingram?

The whole point of tanking was for Simmons or Ingram, no fan in any fanbases ever said "lets tank for Chriss!!" or "lets tank for Bender" or "lets tank for Hield!!".

Except neither Simmons nor Ingram are world-changing talent that is worth tanking for.

 

[3rdside]

And see, here's the problem with your plan (or part of it). I'm not politicking for Bender and I'm not offering an opinion on Chriss. Here's where I'm at. I know very little about Chriss (4 games, that's it) and I know nothing about Bender (a couple of strengths and weaknesses videos).

The "supposed" experts say that Bender is a very high IQ, high motor player and they say Chriss is a very high flying athlete with low BB IQ and an inconsistent motor. I don't know the truth but I do know this, I'm sick and tired of low BBIQ players. If the front office knows better, on either one of these guys, I'll ride with them.

Yes but who do YOU think we should pick? That's the point of this exercise, to see if anyone has any ability to pick talent without the the full picture.

As I've said before, when e.g. you posted earlier who the Suns should pick and then slinslin turns around and says your picks suck (literally as blunt as that) it's kind of annoying because I don't know which of the two of you I should believe more as you both sound pretty credible to me.

The game might be a load of rubbish, or it might not (obviously I think it's not), but it would be fun, and interesting, to try to quantify how much confidence I can put into what either of you are saying.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Except neither Simmons nor Ingram are world-changing talent that is worth tanking for.

You're right chap, the measly additional wins this past season were definitely worth more than the difference between Simmons/Ingram or the pupu platter of hot garbage we are looking at . . .

 

[Chaplin]

You're right chap, the measly additional wins this past season were definitely worth more than the difference between Simmons/Ingram or the pupu platter of hot garbage we are looking at . . .

You don't know that. I'd rather have Simmons, but at the expense of our other players on our roster? I'm still amazed that people think outright tanking is a valid and smart strategy in today's NBA.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

You don't know that. I'd rather have Simmons, but at the expense of our other players on our roster? I'm still amazed that people think outright tanking is a valid and smart strategy in today's NBA.

Chap - nobody is saying that tanking is absolutely always the best strategy, but it's been clear for most of the year this draft has 2 potential stars. The Suns were well placed to have a legitimate chance at a top 2 pick, yet instead of sticking with young players, we collected a couple worthless wins at the end of the year, and the end result is us picking 4th.

Would we be guaranteed a top 2 pick with a couple more losses? Of course not, but the odds would have been significantly better.

From a competitive standpoint, I hate it, but sometimes using your brain and being strategic has its benefits.

 

[Chaplin]

Chap - nobody is saying that tanking is absolutely always the best strategy, but it's been clear for most of the year this draft has 2 potential stars. The Suns were well placed to have a legitimate chance at a top 2 pick, yet instead of sticking with young players, we collected a couple worthless wins at the end of the year, and the end result is us picking 4th.

Would we be guaranteed a top 2 pick with a couple more losses? Of course not, but the odds would have been significantly better.

From a competitive standpoint, I hate it, but sometimes using your brain and being strategic has its benefits.

Yes, but as you know, it's not that simple. Coaching staff, front office and the players have to have buy-in--especially if you have the talent to produce better than abysmal win totals. Our roster wasn't great, but it was far from the worst in the NBA.

If you are bad enough, you don't HAVE to tank, you're going to lose regardless, look at Philly. But if you need to actively strive to lose games, you better have players and staff that will go along with that. And that is a tall order IMO in such a spectator-driven (read: money) league.

 

[Russ Smith]

Maybe the Suns tanked a year early but by not getting a top 2 pick this year it increases their odds of getting a high pick next year when the draft is much better?

Looking at kids like Josh Jackson, Jayson Tatum, Harry Giles, Markelle Fultz, Lonzo Ball, Dennis Smith etc.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Yes, but as you know, it's not that simple. Coaching staff, front office and the players have to have buy-in--especially if you have the talent to produce better than abysmal win totals. Our roster wasn't great, but it was far from the worst in the NBA.

If you are bad enough, you don't HAVE to tank, you're going to lose regardless, look at Philly. But if you need to actively strive to lose games, you better have players and staff that will go along with that. And that is a tall order IMO in such a spectator-driven (read: money) league.

Chap - if you look back this year, it was that simple. With only a couple more losses, we'd have been in a much better position for a top 2 pick. Whether that's selling it as "getting the young guys minutes" or "resting" vets, it wouldn't have been very hard for the Suns to lose a couple more games and be in position for a much more attractive option.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Maybe the Suns tanked a year early but by not getting a top 2 pick this year it increases their odds of getting a high pick next year when the draft is much better?

Looking at kids like Josh Jackson, Jayson Tatum, Harry Giles, Markelle Fultz, Lonzo Ball, Dennis Smith etc.

Really hoping we're taking the long game view on this one, and that we draft the best players available, not the most NBA ready. With a couple solid draft picks (all of who get big minutes this year) and another top 3-5 pick, we would have a solid foundation to build on.

Sadly, knowing it's Sarver, the odds of this happening are incredibly slim.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Maybe the Suns tanked a year early but by not getting a top 2 pick this year it increases their odds of getting a high pick next year when the draft is much better?

Looking at kids like Josh Jackson, Jayson Tatum, Harry Giles, Markelle Fultz, Lonzo Ball, Dennis Smith etc.

Problem is you should tank when you have injuries to your better players like his year. Next year we come back healthy and pick late lottery again and remain in mediocrity limbo.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Chap - nobody is saying that tanking is absolutely always the best strategy, but it's been clear for most of the year this draft has 2 potential stars. The Suns were well placed to have a legitimate chance at a top 2 pick, yet instead of sticking with young players, we collected a couple worthless wins at the end of the year, and the end result is us picking 4th.

Would we be guaranteed a top 2 pick with a couple more losses? Of course not, but the odds would have been significantly better.

From a competitive standpoint, I hate it, but sometimes using your brain and being strategic has its benefits.

We were not catching the Lakers or the Sixers. So a few more wins would have taken our odds from 25% to 31% (for a top two pick). I think 6.7% better odds is not that significant and would likely have made no difference whatsoever.

 

[devilalum]

You don't know that. I'd rather have Simmons, but at the expense of our other players on our roster? I'm still amazed that people think outright tanking is a valid and smart strategy in today's NBA.

Why not? Its done wonders for Philly.

sent from a fone

 

[AzStevenCal]

Yes but who do YOU think we should pick? That's the point of this exercise, to see if anyone has any ability to pick talent without the the full picture.

As I've said before, when e.g. you posted earlier who the Suns should pick and then slinslin turns around and says your picks suck (literally as blunt as that) it's kind of annoying because I don't know which of the two of you I should believe more as you both sound pretty credible to me.

The game might be a load of rubbish, or it might not (obviously I think it's not), but it would be fun, and interesting, to try to quantify how much confidence I can put into what either of you are saying.

I'd say, don't believe me. There was a time when I watched a lot of college basketball, the better part of more than 40 games a week during much of the season. But I was recently retired, home alone all the time, rarely slept, loved college basketball and Tivo had just been invented. I knew a lot about most of the prospects and felt confident in my knowledge. I was right on a lot of them but I missed my share too even with all that "work".

Today, my opinions come mostly from watching highlights and from digesting and interpreting the opinions of others. That doesn't make me a scout, far from it. I wouldn't put much stock in the "word" of anyone that brought nothing more to the table than I do. Especially when we're talking about players like Chriss and Bender, both of whom appear to be more project than prospect.

I'll probably play your game for the short time it takes for you to realize how much work it is for so little return but I'm really not invested in any of these players. I knew Durant was going to be special, I knew they were underestimating Wade, but I don't have that kind of feel for anyone in this class. I don't even like my chances of picking a group of 3 players from which will come the player that has the best career of this class.

 

[Ronin]

According to the interwebs Malik Beasley is flying up on some teams draft board.

Steve Kyler ‏@stevekylerNBA 2m2 minutes ago
The players invited to the 2016 NBA Draft Green Room -

\

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Ronin]

Jamal Murray wants to play for the Timberwolves

http://www.startribune.com/jamal-murray-wants-to-play-for-the-timberwolves/383805811/

 

[Ronin]

Nobody wants the #3 pick?

Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine 48m48 minutes ago
ESPN sources say that the Celtics, so far, have been stifled in their attempts to turn the No. 3 pick into an established veteran via trade.

Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine 47m47 minutes ago
Story going online details Boston's thwarted attempts to trade for Jimmy Butler, Gordon Hayward or either Jabari Parker or Khris Middleton.

 

[WildBB]

There was some local radio buzz that the Cavs will be shopping Love during the draft to the top teams in the draft. I would hope the Suns don't entertain that deal. They have a huge mountain to climb in keeping up with the Lakers and their high picks and it will take a few years to compete with GS. Adding Love will do nothing more than make them an 8 to 6 seed; maybe.

 

[sunsfan88]

Except neither Simmons nor Ingram are world-changing talent that is worth tanking for.

So you would take those 5-6 extra wins over Simmons/Ingram? Is there an award for not getting the worst record in the league or something?

Simmons/Ingram for sure have hell of a more chance of being "world-changing talents" than anyone we get at #4, I can assure you that.

 

[AzStevenCal]

So you would take those 5-6 extra wins over Simmons/Ingram? Is there an award for not getting the worst record in the league or something?

Simmons/Ingram for sure have hell of a more chance of being "world-changing talents" than anyone we get at #4, I can assure you that.

You can? I think Ingram has a slightly better chance of being a world changing talent than the players available a few spots later but just slightly. I wouldn't tank for him I'll tell you that. Simmons is a different story. If he wants to be an all time great, he probably will be. I don't know if he'll want to once the NBA and endorsement checks come poring in but there's no denying he has special talent.

 

[3rdside]

I'd say, don't believe me. There was a time when I watched a lot of college basketball, the better part of more than 40 games a week during much of the season. But I was recently retired, home alone all the time, rarely slept, loved college basketball and Tivo had just been invented. I knew a lot about most of the prospects and felt confident in my knowledge. I was right on a lot of them but I missed my share too even with all that "work".


Today, my opinions come mostly from watching highlights and from digesting and interpreting the opinions of others. That doesn't make me a scout, far from it. I wouldn't put much stock in the "word" of anyone that brought nothing more to the table than I do. Especially when we're talking about players like Chriss and Bender, both of whom appear to be more project than prospect.

I'll probably play your game for the short time it takes for you to realize how much work it is for so little return but I'm really not invested in any of these players. I knew Durant was going to be special, I knew they were underestimating Wade, but I don't have that kind of feel for anyone in this class. I don't even like my chances of picking a group of 3 players from which will come the player that has the best career of this class.

"Don't believe me" is hardly the best basis on which to give an opinion ;-)

Just kidding, I get what you mean... the point is though that you give one because you're inclined to believe what you're saying, strongly or otherwise...otherwise you wouldn't have given one in the first place. I think that makes sense!

With the rankings - forgive me if I'm starting to sound repetitive - we'll be able to see how little or a lot your opinion actually means (they will never be a perfect predictor of course) and that's good for both you (you might learn from your mistakes or possibly research harder next time if you want to e.g. be better at the rankings game - better informed posters is never a bad thing) and for the casual reader of this board (they can quantify the level of value they put in your opinions).

And even though you might not have a strong feel for the players in this years draft as there's very few clear cut blue chips, nor does anybody else by default.. So yeah, the results from this draft alone might be a bit random but if this game carried on for 30 years - and your 'feel' for players like Wade and Durant was able to be expressed again and again i.e. quantified - I think inevitably we'd start to see some trends emerging.

(On that note, one thing I would fear is that if trends did emerge then participants in the Draft Power Ranking game might simply mimic the leading participants - perhaps posters will become craftier about expressing their opinions (just like actual GM's - heh) in conjunction with private submission of picks).

And it's really not that much work - based on one draft there would be max 60 players to grade at the all star break next year and then again at seasons end. That sounds ominous if you think it's 60 additional players every year but a lot of these guys won't make the floor ever, most that do will never progress beyond a rating '1' and plenty will be out of the league by the end of their rookie contract (noting the average NBA career length is only being 4.8 years).

 

[3rdside]

You can? I think Ingram has a slightly better chance of being a world changing talent than the players available a few spots later but just slightly. I wouldn't tank for him I'll tell you that. Simmons is a different story. If he wants to be an all time great, he probably will be. I don't know if he'll want to once the NBA and endorsement checks come poring in but there's no denying he has special talent.

Again, who should is more likely to be right? (in this case i'm on sf88's side )

 

[Ronin]

Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine 19m19 minutes ago
Draft Rumble: Hearing Syracuse's Michael Gbinjie may be an 11th-hour riser Thursday night and move into late first/early second round range

 

[AzStevenCal]

Again, who should is more likely to be right? (in this case i'm on sf88's side )

So you're going on record that Ingram has "a hell of a more chance of being a world changing talent than anyone" we can find at 4? In simplistic terms, doesn't that mean he'll have to be MUCH better than the field (minus Simmons and the 3rd pick). IOW, if Chriss makes 13 straight All Star teams, Ingram would have to what, make 13 straight 1st team All NBA teams with one hand tied behind his back? I mean, how do you even measure something like that.

 

[3rdside]

On record as saying Ingram, at this point, is potentially far superior to anything below #2, yes. If Chriss makes that many AS teams then I'm wrong.

If they were both selected as BPA's then you'd get 7pts for each one but as Ingram is not part of any group then it's redundant.