Revisiting McD

[elindholm]

Also, couldn't we say "I don't give McDonough any credit for Booker being on the board at #13. He had no control over that, and Booker would have been there regardless of who the Suns' GM was."? Couldn't we say that about any prospect?

Yes, but Booker wasn't an automatic pick at #13. Different GMs would have gone different directions there. If somehow Jackson had gotten past #4, he was definitely going at #5, so it's not like McDonough had any great insight.

He was patient and let him fall to him. I give him props for that. In an alternate universe he could have traded Bledsoe and #4 for #3.

Then that's a success on the trade front (or lack thereof), not of drafting.

If Jackson turns out to be better than those 3, then McD drafted better than those GMs.

Surely, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Ball is a bust, but I expect definitely Fultz and probably Tatum to out-perform Jackson over the long haul.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Yes, but Booker wasn't an automatic pick at #13. Different GMs would have gone different directions there. If somehow Jackson had gotten past #4, he was definitely going at #5, so it's not like McDonough had any great insight.



Then that's a success on the trade front (or lack thereof), not of drafting.



Surely, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Ball is a bust, but I expect definitely Fultz and probably Tatum to out-perform Jackson over the long haul.

I don't think it's guarantee jackson goes fifth. Sactown was clearly enamored with fox.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Right; no one would have drafted a scrub there, so it's kind of meaningless to compare McDonough to a nonexistent person. The only other realistic option to Jackson was Fox. If Jackson ends up significantly outperforming Fox, then that will make him a better pick in hindsight.

I don't give McDonough any credit for Jackson being on the board at #4. He had no control over that, and Jackson would have been there regardless of who the Suns' GM was.



I'd put it slightly differently. Did he draft players who overperformed their draft position? That's how GMs get ahead in the draft -- not to get good players at good draft slots, but to get better players at those slots than other GMs would have.

You can't establish yourself as a good drafter if you get #1 every time. You're expected to take the best player, and if you don't, you've failed. On the other hand, it's relatively easy to be a good drafter if you're always at the end of the first round, like the Spurs, because anyone who turns out to be good has beaten the odds.

I agree that Booker was a great pick. Several GMs who passed on him are kicking themselves. That's the name of the game.

How many times have we seen GMs, in love with their own persona and with extraordinary egos, make reaches in a draft spot like that just to prove how much smarter they are than everyone else?

Kwame Brown, Michael Olowakandi, Hasheem Thabeet, Darko, Morrison, Vazquez etc.

I like the fact that McD just chooses the best player and is not trying to prove himself better than everyone else.

 

[Chaplin]

Ball is a bust,

What?

 

[elindholm]

How many times have we seen GMs, in love with their own persona and with extraordinary egos, make reaches in a draft spot like that just to prove how much smarter they are than everyone else?

Kwame Brown, Michael Olowakandi, Hasheem Thabeet, Darko, Morrison, Vazquez etc.

A lot of those were the consensus picks at their positions, so, while I agree that they were bad, I don't think it's fair to attribute the mistakes to ego.

I like the fact that McD just chooses the best player and is not trying to prove himself better than everyone else.

So if McDonough had bucked the collective wisdom and taken Jackson #1, as apparently he was prepared to, would that have been a good pick or a bad one?

 

[Phrazbit]

A lot of those were the consensus picks at their positions, so, while I agree that they were bad, I don't think it's fair to attribute the mistakes to ego.



So if McDonough had bucked the collective wisdom and taken Jackson #1, as apparently he was prepared to, would that have been a good pick or a bad one?

Not as good as if you could trade back and get him at 4. But I don't buy the "we would have taken him #1" talk. Every team says that crap. I think Boston takes him over Tatum (who they claim they would have picked first) if he'd worked out for them.

 

[elindholm]

Not as good as if you could trade back and get him at 4. But I don't buy the "we would have taken him #1" talk. Every team says that crap. I think Boston takes him over Tatum (who they claim they would have picked first) if he'd worked out for them.

Ah, now I get it. This is all to support the fantasy that McDonough outfoxed Ainge by hiding Jackson from him. I'll just have to say that I find that extremely unlikely.

 

[Phrazbit]

Ah, now I get it. This is all to support the fantasy that McDonough outfoxed Ainge by hiding Jackson from him. I'll just have to say that I find that extremely unlikely.

You're reading too deep in the tea leafs. I'm saying GMs are full of it, public pronouncements of who they would have taken number one should be considered BS. I don't buy Jackson being the guy at the top of the Suns board and I don't think Tatum was at the top of the celtics.

 

[JCSunsfan]

You're reading too deep in the tea leafs. I'm saying GMs are full of it, public pronouncements of who they would have taken number one should be considered BS. I don't buy Jackson being the guy at the top of the Suns board and I don't think Tatum was at the top of the celtics.

I agree. I think they would have taken Fultz or Ball #1. I think they like Ball alot. They would have taken Fultz/Ball #2, and then Jackson at 3.

 

[Errntknght]

I agree. I think they would have taken Fultz or Ball #1. I think they like Ball alot. They would have taken Fultz/Ball #2, and then Jackson at 3.

It was my fear that that's exactly what they'd have done, at least with Fultz. I wasn't as sure about Ball but I was awfully relieved when they were both off the table at our pick. I think Ulis is a better all around PG than any of the ones available in the draft and he'd have been relegated to oblivion just because we picked one with such a high pick. He's already more 'Nash-like' than Steve was at his age and he'll improve as he plays with the team - and they'll improve too, as they learn how to get themselves available for his passes. (It would be foolish to predict he'll become as good a shooter as Nash did but I expect him to develop exquisite shot selection.) So almost Nash, with better D.

 

[Mainstreet]

You're reading too deep in the tea leafs. I'm saying GMs are full of it, public pronouncements of who they would have taken number one should be considered BS. I don't buy Jackson being the guy at the top of the Suns board and I don't think Tatum was at the top of the celtics.

I think the Suns would have drafted Ball with all circumstances being equal. However, since the Celtics knew who was being drafted a head of them, it appears Tatum was at the top of their board or equal with Fultz and Ball.

 

[Phrazbit]

I think the Suns would have drafted Ball with all circumstances being equal. However, since the Celtics knew who was being drafted a head of them, it appears Tatum was at the top of their board or equal with Fultz and Ball.

I disagree, why fly across the country at the 11th hour to meet Jackson if they were locked in on Tatum? IMO Jackson was their guy at 3 but they over played their hand.

And I bet they had Fultz as bpa but felt he was a bad fit given their roster.

 

[Raze]

I absolutely buy that the Suns had Jackson as their #1 overall prospect.

Neither Ball nor Sleepy Jr. have any idea how to play D. And the Suns were already terrible on D. Those guys would have taken Bledsoe's spot (presumably) who is one of our better defenders. Could you imagine how awful we'd be on D adding one of those two?

And Jackson SHOULD be considered #1 overall. After watching tape on the three of them I was surprised how many people had him going #3 behind them. I wouldn't be surprised if many teams had him ranked higher than the other 3.

I know many GMs are lying when they say they had their guy #1 on the board. I don't think it's true in this case. If you polled the pundits out there, you could bet that most would have Jackson as our #1. Fultz and Ball were far from can't miss prospects and bad fits here.

And just to stick my neck out further, I didn't have either Ball or Fultz in my top 5 prospects: They were firmly behind Jackson, Fox, Isaac, Smith, and Collins. I didn't like what I saw when I watched those two play. Actually there was a lot I didn't like.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

How many times have we seen GMs, in love with their own persona and with extraordinary egos, make reaches in a draft spot like that just to prove how much smarter they are than everyone else?

Kwame Brown, Michael Olowakandi, Hasheem Thabeet, Darko, Morrison, Vazquez etc.

I like the fact that McD just chooses the best player and is not trying to prove himself better than everyone else.

Most of those weren't considered reaches. They were consensus picks. Or maybe 50-50 picks (olowakandi vs bibby was close for example).

 

[Mainstreet]

I disagree, why fly across the country at the 11th hour to meet Jackson if they were locked in on Tatum? IMO Jackson was their guy at 3 but they over played their hand.

I see your point about the Celtics.

And I bet they had Fultz as bpa but felt he was a bad fit given their roster.

However, I still believe the Suns would have drafted Ball over Fultz because of his passing skills. Ball would have made everyone on the Suns team better.

 

[Finito]

We just picked #4 overall after our worst season in franchise history. His GM'ing led to that worst all time season.

Hes still a hapless moron.

Im not going to congratulate him for drafting Jackson. Good Job! You did the obvious right thing! What ace scouting skills went into that decision? A monkey could do that.

This how the NBA works you do understand that right. The single worst place to be in the NBA is in the middle. Ask the Spurs how tanking and getting Duncan worked out for them

 

[Bodha]

This how the NBA works you do understand that right. The single worst place to be in the NBA is in the middle. Ask the Spurs how tanking and getting Duncan worked out for them

Conversely if we were trying our hardest last season we wouldve been in game 7 vs the Cavs?

 

[pokerface]

Conversely if we were trying our hardest last season we wouldve been in game 7 vs the Cavs?

Are you a McD troll? I guess you liked Kerr better??


Good luck because McDonough is going to be around awhile.