# Draft Winners/Losers....???



## AUNDRE (Jul 11, 2005)

Winners...

Nets
Bulls
Rockets (I like the Rudy Gay for Battier Move)


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

Winners...
Portland

Losers...
Portland


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Winners:
Nets
Bulls
Memphis

Losers:
Who else? Knicks


----------



## frank_white (Apr 20, 2005)

I'd add utah and charlotte to the winners list. 

I like the addition of Brewer and Dee Brown to Utah's backcourt


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

too early to give any kind of grades until after free agency, to me atlanta,boston, portland would have me scratching my head. of course i'm happy for charlotte and morrison, he is a perfect fit there, i look for massive turnaround for them in the win loss department, just my take.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

NJ just keeps winning - Adams, Jefferson, Carter

That could be next year's dunk contest


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

Portland did some crazy ****, but they're walking away with Aldridge and Roy. Not bad.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

I don't know about "loser" but I am not real happy with Orlando's draft. They could have gotten incredibly more athletic taking Carney, Alexander Johnson, and Hassan Adams or Diaz. Instead they got Redick and Augustine.


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

Winners: I could care less

Losers: Pacers :curse: :curse: ....You did us dirty tonight Bird, would've never expected that from him.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

> I don't know about "loser" but I am not real happy with Orlando's draft. They could have gotten incredibly more athletic taking Carney, Alexander Johnson, and Hassan Adams or Diaz. Instead they got Redick and Augustine.


definitely didn't get any more athletic

you really didn't want Johnson


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The Nets have Hassan Adams, Josh Boone and Marcus Williams? Damn, the Nets won this draft, simply because they needed to upgrade the bench in a tremendous way. All 3 guys excel in a running environment (that's if the Nets push the tempo more). 

Adams should thrive getting passes from Kidd and Williams.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

TM said:


> definitely didn't get any more athletic
> 
> you really didn't want Johnson


Augustine makes them more athletic. I really thought the Suns should have tried to get into the second round to pick him. He would have been a great fit for them.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

HKF said:


> The Nets have Hassan Adams, Josh Boone and Marcus Williams? Damn, the Nets won this draft, simply because they needed to upgrade the bench in a tremendous way. All 3 guys excel in a running environment (that's if the Nets push the tempo more).
> 
> Adams should thrive getting passes from Kidd and Williams.



That's true ... I don't think any of those 3 will ever be that great but all 3 guys can probably play next year and contribute off the bench. Big plus for the Nets.


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

Exactly, HKF

Think about it. They were already a playoff team. they got 3 spots better. All guys that, IMO, can come in and play right away. That team is gonna be fast and good. East coast Suns (minus the outside shooting)?


----------



## AriGold23 (Jul 19, 2002)

Winners:

Portland- Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge are going to be the cornerstones for the future of this franchise. Sergio Rodriguez was a solid pickup as well. Didn't like the pick of the "grocery bagger" but he will stay overseas for now anyways. 2nd round brought them James White who is a solid athletic wing player with highlight reel potential.

A lineup of Jarret Jack-Brandon Roy-Darius Miles-Zach Randolph-LaMarcus Aldridge has some good long-term potential.

New Jersey- Got the steal of the draft with Marcus Williams falling all the way to them. Then followed it up with some much needed frontcourt help in Josh Boone. Hassan Adams toward the end of the 2nd round was a good pick too.

Memphis- Rudy Gay and Kyle Lowry were great pickups for the Grizzlies. Jerry West looks like he's done it again. Gay has the potential to be the best player out of this draft, and if anyone can get him motivated its "The Logo." Lowry should replace Bobby Jackson for now, while being groomed as the future starting PG.

Charlotte- Only had 1 pick, and thats all they needed. Morrison was the perfect fit for this team and they weren't swayed by the potential of Gay.

Losers:

Atlanta- Shelden Williams at #5, and then Solomon Jones at the beginning of the 2nd Round. Wow....

Seattle- Saer Sene makes 3 project centers with Swift and Petro being the other 7-foot scrubs.

New York Knicks- Renaldo Balkman at #20. Collins at the end of the 1st was solid, but Balkman at #20 was just horrid. Thomas makes Layden look half-way smart.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

It looks to me as though the Hornets did really well to pick up two big men who are probably going to help them out pretty well.They need to have PJ Brown play far fewer minutes(assuming they don't trade him and his contract somewhere else).

I love Shane Battier as much as every coach in the league would,but if Memphis can get Rudy Gay for Battier then they had a pretty good night.They got Lowry who will provide them backcourt depth and a guy with the potential to develop into a star.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

People are dissing the Knicks but fail to realize they didnt need anymore guards when $50 million dollars is already being paid in their backcourt alone. I know people don't like the Balkman pick, but he was selected to be a role player in what was largely a role player draft.

I think Balkman is their way to replace Ariza. Knicks need guys who don't need the ball to play hard. That's why they chose him.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

PaCeRhOLiC said:


> Winners: I could care less
> 
> Losers: Pacers :curse: :curse: ....You did us dirty tonight Bird, would've never expected that from him.


You are seriously underrating Williams and I'll leave my comments about White out of this. The Pacers got a steal in this draft.


----------



## Charlotte_______ (May 18, 2003)

Why not draft Marcus Williams and trade him for a future 1st rounder?


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

HKF said:


> People are dissing the Knicks but fail to realize they didnt need anymore guards when $50 million dollars is already being paid in their backcourt alone. I know people don't like the Balkman pick, but he was selected to be a role player in what was largely a role player draft.
> 
> I think Balkman is their way to replace Ariza. Knicks need guys who don't need the ball to play hard. That's why they chose him.


Balkman would have been there in the second round. There was no reason to burn a first rounder on him, none.


----------



## Ghost (Jun 21, 2002)

Winners

Grizz
Nets
Minnesota
Lakers

Loosers
Houston
Seattle
Alanta


Can't Tell
Blazers
Knicks
Pacers


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> You are seriously underrating Williams and I'll leave my comments about White out of this. The Pacers got a steal in this draft.


Uh...he said 'winners' not Williams.


----------



## Real (Aug 3, 2005)

Charlotte_______ said:


> Why not draft Marcus Williams and trade him for a future 1st rounder?


Because Marcus Williams is the best PG in this draft and the Nets' future replacement and current backup for Jason Kidd.


----------



## Charlotte_______ (May 18, 2003)

Net2 said:


> Because Marcus Williams is the best PG in this draft and the Nets' future replacement and current backup for Jason Kidd.


I was talking to Knicks fans, he was available there and could have been traded to someone else.


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

Houston is dumb.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

JNice said:


> That's true ... I don't think any of those 3 will ever be that great but all 3 guys can probably play next year and contribute off the bench. Big plus for the Nets.


That's what they needed. Some good role-players. They already have the stars.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Net2 said:


> Uh...he said 'winners' not Williams.


Seriously, what in the hell is this comment suppose to mean?


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

Does anybody know of a site that has a list of which players ended up with each NBA team?


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> Seriously, what in the hell is this comment suppose to mean?




LMAO.


----------



## DANNY (Aug 9, 2005)

LOL at the Knicks
could of drafted M williams or farmar and they draft... :drumroll:

BALKMAN

:clap:


----------



## -33- (Aug 6, 2002)

Winner:

Miami

They traded Brian Grant, Caron Butler, Lamar Odom, and Jordan Farmar for Shaq.

And won a championship 2 years later.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Remember the name Thabo Sefolosha, guy is going to be a special player. He is going to be better than Brandon Roy, he's going to be better than Rodney Carney, better than Ronnie Brewer, he is going to be a very good player.


----------



## Aurelino (Jul 25, 2003)

sloth said:


> Remember the name Thabo Sefolosha, guy is going to be a special player. He is going to be better than Brandon Roy, he's going to be better than Rodney Carney, better than Ronnie Brewer, he is going to be a very good player.


He has to be, since the BULLS drafted him.


----------



## LameR (Jan 4, 2004)

iverson3 said:


> Winners:
> 
> Portland- Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge are going to be the cornerstones for the future of this franchise. Sergio Rodriguez was a solid pickup as well. Didn't like the pick of the "grocery bagger" but he will stay overseas for now anyways. 2nd round brought them James White who is a solid athletic wing player with highlight reel potential.
> 
> A lineup of Jarret Jack-Brandon Roy-Darius Miles-Zach Randolph-LaMarcus Aldridge has some good long-term potential.


A couple of things....

1. We traded White for a future 2nd rounder (as we did with a lot of things tonight).
2. No freaking way Miles (or Roy at SG) starts over Webster. Yeah, Webster is probably more of a SG, but Miles is a cancer that everyone hates, and a lineup of: 

Jack
Roy
Webster
Zach
Aldridge

...for the future looks pretty good. Just have to actually let them develop rather than trading them away (ala JO and maybe Telfair).


----------



## clips_r_teh_wieners (Nov 4, 2005)

i think i should represent the clips cuz they didnt own any first round draft picks and so they dont get noticed this year. but they did pretty well with their 2 2nd round picks with paul davis, a big who looks like a solid backup, and diaz, a freak athlete with a decent jumpshot. ya i was pretty thrilled getting diaz at 54. whether he is a steal or not we shall find out...


----------



## Unique (Apr 13, 2005)

Lakers came out pretty good!


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Aurelino said:


> He has to be, since the BULLS drafted him.


Yup, he salvaged the Bulls draft. The ship was damn near sunk after the #2 pick, guys special. 

As far as the All Rookie teams, I'll say

1st
------
G-JJ Reddick
G-Thabo Sefolosha
F-Morrison
F-LaMarcus Aldridge
C-Andrea Bargnani

2nd
------
G-Randy Foye
G-Brandon Roy
F-Rudy Gay
F-Tyrus Thomas
C-Patrick O'Bryant

Although, I think Aldrdige/Bargnani at center will be more of a token pick at center, both are really powerforwards.

My rankings for who turns out the best from each position at the draft:

Point Guards
----------
1. Marcus Williams (New Jersey)
2. Kyle Lowry (Memphis)
3. Jordan Farmar (LA Lakers)
4. Rajon Rondo (Boston)
5. Sergio Rodriguez (Portland)

Shooting Guards
---------------
1. JJ Reddick (Orlando)
2. Thabo Sefolosha (Chicago)
3. Randy Foye (Minnesota)
4. Shannon Brown (Cleveland)
5. Brandon Roy (Portland)

Small Forwards
--------------
1. Adam Morrison (Charlotte)
2. Rudy Gay (memphis)
3. Renaldo Balkman (new york)
4. Steve Novak (Houston)

Power Forwards
---------------
1. Andrea Bargnani (Toronto)
2. LaMarcus Aldridge (Portland)
3. Tyrus Thomas (Chicago)
4. Shelden Williams (Atlanta)
5. Hilton Armstrong (New Orleans)

Centers
------------
1. Saer Sene (Seattle)
2. Patrick O'Bryant (Golden St.)


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

The Knicks draft is on hold for now, well at least to me it is. Stehen A actually made a good point. They got a guy that doesnt want to shoot everytime he gets the ball. A hustle, high energy guy that is willing to do the little things. It might just be what the doctor prescribed for that team.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

sloth said:


> Remember the name Thabo Sefolosha, guy is going to be a special player. He is going to be better than Brandon Roy, he's going to be better than Rodney Carney, better than Ronnie Brewer, he is going to be a very good player.


He's not very good.

Carney was a much better pick.


----------



## WhoDaBest23 (Apr 16, 2003)

The Nets made out like bandits in the draft. Williams, Boone, and Adams... Seriously look at that talent! I can't believe Williams dropped to them, but he should be great playing behind Kidd. They're all gonna look great running on that team. Even though I thought they should've kept Foye, the Blazers had a great draft with Aldridge and Roy. I mean it cost them some (I still can't believe they actually traded Telfair), but wow. They will definitely be impact rookies, looking forward to that.. I'm content with the Bulls taking Thomas now and the Thabo guy seems like a good player. Must be if they traded up for him. I have nothing to say about Houston and Gay if the Battier trade goes down. Stupidity. Oh and finally, Morrison to the Bobcats! :clap:


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Well, I lined up the teams in order of who I thought came out best today and then assigned REAL grades. I noticed Chad Ford didn't give a single D and like 8 A's and that really made me mad. I didn't grade teams who only grabbed second rounders because they tend to not make much difference, and for the most part second rounders aren't taken into consideration at all. The one thing that might cause you to dislike a particular grade was my odd standard. Basically I asked myself "how much better are they today than they were yesterday?"

Memphis A+
Portland A

Chicago B (no B+'s because I don't think one of these teams was better than another. Still don't think TT is a good fit for the Bulls, just because they drafted him doesn't magically make me forget that I think he's a bad fit)
Cleveland B
Boston B
Charlotte B
Toronto B-

Minnesota C+
New Orleans C+
Utah C+
LA Lakers C+
Philadelphia C
New Jersey C (not a M-Will fan, and hate Boone)
Atlanta C
Sacramento C-
Houston C-
Orlando C-
Dallas C-

Washington D+
Indiana D
Golden State D-

Seattle F (Swift and Petro aren't raw enough! Let's not help our front line, but waste a contract!)
New York F


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Nimreitz said:


> Chicago B (no B+'s because I don't think one of these teams was better than another. Still don't think TT is a good fit for the Bulls, just because they drafted him doesn't magically make me forget that I think he's a bad fit)


I agree, TT isn't a good fit with this team in my opinion. Yes he provides energy, but so does Nocioni, Chandler and Duhon. TT isn't a low post type of player who will be drawing double teams in the NBA. I hope Chicago doesn't attempt to turn him into this either, as it will only stunt his development. He will become a freelance type of player who will be running, rebounding, dunking, blocking shots and hitting mid range jumpers. The problem with this is he will get in the way of Chandler when it comes to rebounding and blocking shots and he'll get in the way of Nocioni, Deng and now Sefolosha everywhere else.


----------



## New Jazzy Nets (Jan 25, 2006)

sloth said:


> My rankings for who turns out the best from each position at the draft:
> 
> Point Guards
> ----------
> ...



No Carney or Brewer or Douby or Ager? How bout Boone or Simmons? I just feel your list is without some players that should be there. I mean how can you put Shannon Brown in and not any of the first 4 I mentioned?


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

why is no one talking about the spurs' pick? he will make you all will pay for ignoring him...just like ginobili did.


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

You don't draft swing role players. You draft the best player available.Then trade him for the role players you need.They would be vets that can play right now. The Knicks need to make a move now. 

Like Houston did. TMac is almost done.They don't have time to wait for Gay.They drafted the best prospect then, traded for Battier who can play now. Battier is a heck of a lot better than Balkman !!


----------



## LA68 (Apr 3, 2004)

WhoDaBest23 said:


> The Nets made out like bandits in the draft. Williams, Boone, and Adams... Seriously look at that talent! I can't believe Williams dropped to them, but he should be great playing behind Kidd. They're all gonna look great running on that team. Even though I thought they should've kept Foye, the Blazers had a great draft with Aldridge and Roy. I mean it cost them some (I still can't believe they actually traded Telfair), but wow. They will definitely be impact rookies, looking forward to that.. I'm content with the Bulls taking Thomas now and the Thabo guy seems like a good player. Must be if they traded up for him. I have nothing to say about Houston and Gay if the Battier trade goes down. Stupidity. Oh and finally, Morrison to the Bobcats! :clap:


Why don't more teams get young players BEFORE the vets are done. Williams can take over for Kidd. Boone can take over for Collins Now I think!! And if they don't work out, you have time to get someone else. Great moves.


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

Props to the Clippers, who have an excellent team and managed to draft two players in the second round that will make the roster.

The strides they have made are astonishing. They were more embarassing than the Knicks are now for 20 years.


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

ghoti said:


> Props to the Clippers, who have an excellent team and managed to draft two players in the second round that will make the roster.
> 
> The strides they have made are astonishing. They were more embarassing than the Knicks are now for 20 years.



exactly.

davis+diaz=solid draft.


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

HKF said:


> People are dissing the Knicks but fail to realize they didnt need anymore guards when $50 million dollars is already being paid in their backcourt alone. I know people don't like the Balkman pick, but he was selected to be a role player in what was largely a role player draft.
> 
> I think Balkman is their way to replace Ariza. Knicks need guys who don't need the ball to play hard. That's why they chose him.



This might have made sense if they didn't use their second pick to draft a guard anyway.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The OUTLAW said:


> This might have made sense if they didn't use their second pick to draft a guard anyway.


Still Mardy Collins is not a PG. He's a SG. Heck he won't even play right away. I don't think Balkman or Collins were bad picks because the Knicks sleected role players. It's not like they needed Marcus Williams, Lowry or Farmar. So for them it was always going to be hustle players. 

Big picture here.


----------



## L (Sep 20, 2005)

Losers: Knicks, they could have drafted Williams(with #20) and Balkman(with #29)...or just draft collins with the #29.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

duncan2k5 said:


> why is no one talking about the spurs' pick? he will make you all will pay for ignoring him...just like ginobili did.


Because they traded him to Milwaukee guy.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

bootstrenf said:


> exactly.
> 
> davis+diaz=solid draft.


Solid.... ?

Davis is as soft as you get, and Diaz is no better than Darius Washington or Daniel Gibson.


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

vigilante said:


> Solid.... ?
> 
> Davis is as soft as you get, and Diaz is no better than Darius Washington or Daniel Gibson.



you're the one who proposed a trade in the clippers forum that had the clips giving away shaun livingston+corey maggette+quinton ross for morris peterson, villanueva, and bonner.

you have absolutely no credibility to me.

next.


----------



## Nashaholic (Mar 30, 2005)

Why has no one mentioned T.???

Bargnani is the best player in this draft even if getting him was just good luck at the lottery.

Other than the raps the nets got a lot out of their draft. How did williams fall so far. How many hot computers did he sell?


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Yeah, I really do believe Bargnani is the best prospect in this draft and I've said it leading up to the draft.

Two things, first of all Paul Davis and Guillermo Diaz does not a good draft make. Davis is going to be a terrible NBA big man, and I don't think Diaz will ever crack a rotation, even on a bad team. He has no handle and no shot, and he's 6'3'', OOOOH, where do I sign up!! Secondly, if the Knicks wanted role players, they could have drafted guys with first round talent who had the right attitude, who would accept being role players in the League. They are out there, not everyone is comming in with a "I'm the man" attitude. There are legitimately guys who are just happy to be there and will do everything in their power to stay, David Lee and Nate Robinson are good examples. I don't really like either, but if you want role players, these are the kind of guys with the right attitude and the talent to match. I think Collins will be a great coach one day, but he isn't an NBA player, and neither is Balkman.


----------



## crazyfan (Dec 9, 2005)

Utah had a brilliant draft. They filled draft needs and drafted great players for those needs. Brewer, Brown and Millsap! Fantastic


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

Nimreitz said:


> Yeah, I really do believe Bargnani is the best prospect in this draft and I've said it leading up to the draft.
> 
> Two things, first of all Paul Davis and Guillermo Diaz does not a good draft make. Davis is going to be a terrible NBA big man, and I don't think Diaz will ever crack a rotation, even on a bad team. He has no handle and no shot, and he's 6'3'', OOOOH, where do I sign up!! Secondly, if the Knicks wanted role players, they could have drafted guys with first round talent who had the right attitude, who would accept being role players in the League. They are out there, not everyone is comming in with a "I'm the man" attitude. There are legitimately guys who are just happy to be there and will do everything in their power to stay, David Lee and Nate Robinson are good examples. I don't really like either, but if you want role players, these are the kind of guys with the right attitude and the talent to match. I think Collins will be a great coach one day, but he isn't an NBA player, and neither is Balkman.



this is what you think. you didn't provide a single reason why you don't think they will be good. brilliant analysis.


----------



## BULLS23 (Apr 13, 2003)

ralaw said:


> I agree, TT isn't a good fit with this team in my opinion. Yes he provides energy, but so does Nocioni, Chandler and Duhon. TT isn't a low post type of player who will be drawing double teams in the NBA. I hope Chicago doesn't attempt to turn him into this either, as it will only stunt his development. He will become a freelance type of player who will be running, rebounding, dunking, blocking shots and hitting mid range jumpers. The problem with this is he will get in the way of Chandler when it comes to rebounding and blocking shots and he'll get in the way of Nocioni, Deng and now Sefolosha everywhere else.



I agree with this . . . Just because my fav team took him doesn't mean he isn't a bad fit. I hope that they don't think he's suddenly going to become Tim Duncan, cause that's not his game.


----------



## ghoti (Jan 30, 2005)

Early thoughts.

Picks I still don't like - Shelden Williams at #5 and Redick at #11.

Picks I really like - Pecherov at #18, Marcus Williams at #22, Farmar at #26

Early steal of the draft - Millsap at #47


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Morrison was a bad pick. I was waiting for a full season to go by to say it but man you just knew this guy would be terrible.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Well, I lined up the teams in order of who I thought came out best today and then assigned REAL grades. I noticed Chad Ford didn't give a single D and like 8 A's and that really made me mad. I didn't grade teams who only grabbed second rounders because they tend to not make much difference, and for the most part second rounders aren't taken into consideration at all. The one thing that might cause you to dislike a particular grade was my odd standard. Basically I asked myself "how much better are they today than they were yesterday?"
> 
> Memphis A+
> Portland A
> ...


Let's assess.

Memphis: A little too high on Gay, but still a good value pick considering his talent to the other rookies and where he was picked. Trading Battier doesn't look as smart though. Lowry was a good pick. Also got Johnson in the second round who had an impressive campaign for where he was picked.

Portland: Jury's still out, but trading Telfair for Roy and getting Aldridge look like A's to me. (I didn't even like Roy that much. oops!)

Chicago: TT and Sefolosha are definitely in the running for best draft.
Cleveland: This was Gibson, and he looks like a B from the second round. Brown not bad, but not a B pick.
Boston: Hahahahahaha, whoops! Rondo wasn't bad though.
Charlotte: Didn't like Morrison, but I liked the fit for both him and the Bobcats. Turns out fit doesn't matter much if you suck.
Toronto: I undersold Bargnani even though I loved him.

Minnesota: Foye looks like C+ish to me.
New Orleans: Probably deserved a D or F, but the jury is still out on their picks.
Utah: Brewer seems like a C. Milsap and Brown might push this into the low B's.
LA Lakers: Farmer isn't great, but was an average pick considering where they were. Definite C.
Philadelphia: Carney didn't emerge like some thought. Not a bad guy.
New Jersey: Williams and Boone still look like C's.
Atlanta: Sheldon. Ugh.
Sacramento: Probably should be a D or F; wasn't helped by Martin's great year.
Houston: Too down on Battier, not fair to Houston.
Orlando: Redick is probably more of a D-, but not too far off.
Dallas: Still don't really like Ager.

Washington: Pecherov's a definite D.
Indiana: Shawne's a definite D.
Golden State: Patrick O'Bryant's a definite D (or F)

Seattle: Sene still looking like a big fat F to me.
New York: Probably not fair to Balkman and Collins, but they still aren't first rounders. I'd give a D+ now.

Not a bad analysis if I may say so myself.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

You give New York's draft a D+ after how Balkman played this year? Why? Balkman proved to be a valuable role player and better player than Marcus Williams who people seemed to think the Knicks should take. Mardy Collins made the most infamous distinction by starting a brawl, but he looked very solid near the end of the year when the Knicks had all of their injury problems. It's not easy to play on a Knicks team with 14 guaranteed contracts (and all guys who expect to play).


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

I understand that, but I don't think they made the team that much better. I respect what Balkman does for the team (I don't like Collins, but that doesn't matter), but the Knicks COULD have had him in the second round, and he is never going to be a starter. Maybe they deserve a C.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Nimreitz said:


> I understand that, but I don't think they made the team that much better. I respect what Balkman does for the team (I don't like Collins, but that doesn't matter), but the Knicks COULD have had him in the second round, and he is never going to be a starter. Maybe they deserve a C.


Now if they belong in the 2nd round, who are you saying should have gone over them? And were the players that should have gone over them originally first round picks in your mind? 

For that Knicks team they needed a SF and a guard. Here are the SF's that went after Balkman. 

PJ Tucker, Toronto (cut by the team, went to the D-League)
Steve Novak, Houston (hasn't played in like 3 months)
David Noel, Milwaukee (played some, also went to the D-League)

I think you're making this draft out to be deeper than it really was. The best two guys of the second round were Craig Smith and Paul Millsap. 

As for Mardy Collins, the only guy you could also pick over him would have been Daniel Gibson and the truth is, he would not have played on the Knicks when you have Marbury, Francis, Crawford and Robinson. I don't think the Knicks should get an A, but look at the 2006 NBA draft again. When you're picking in the 20's in a weak draft, who are you going to select that's a great selection?

http://www.nba.com/draft2006/board.html


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

HKF said:


> Now if they belong in the 2nd round, who are you saying should have gone over them? And were the players that should have gone over them originally first round picks in your mind?
> 
> For that Knicks team they needed a SF and a guard. Here are the SF's that went after Balkman.
> 
> ...


It's a fair point no doubt, but the Knicks didn't really NEED anything. They are fine at guard and they could have kept Rose. Draft the Best Player Available. Now I can accept the Balkman pick in hindsight because he really is just what they needed. A gritty role player with no delusions of grandeur, but I can't accept two picks of guys without talent. Instead of Collins, how about James White, David Noel, Daniel Gibson, Alexander Johnson, and yeah that's about it. It wasn't a good draft granted, but there was talent out there and I don't see any possible value in giving Mardy Collins a contract. In perfect hindsight I would have tried to trade completely out of the first round altogether and got a future first rounder.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

My only thing is that White, Noel, Gibson and Johnson right now are really no better than Collins. Gibson has an argument, but White hasn't done anything other than get cut by Indiana and get signed by San Antonio (and play zero minutes). Johnson played for the worst team in the NBA that was noticeably tanking and Noel the same on the Bucks. I don't think Collins is that talented, but he is probably going to stick in the NBA as an Aaron McKie type role player.

I think if we looked five years down the road, James White and David Noel probably will not be in the NBA. Johnson will be on his 4th team and Gibson may stick with Cleveland. Still don't think the 2nd to last pick in the first round was bad for Collins, especially if he goes on to have a long term NBA career. 

14.7 ppg, 5.8 apg, 5.5 rpg, 1.9 spg (last 10 games)

These are Collins' numbers in the last 10 games of the season, admittedly he played a lot of minutes due to injuries and the team went 2-8 during this stretch, but I think this guy showed that he could at least compete in the pros and become a valuable contributor to an NBA team. Now he was picked 29, so why would that be a bad thing.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

HKF said:


> My only thing is that White, Noel, Gibson and Johnson right now are really no better than Collins. Gibson has an argument, but White hasn't done anything other than get cut by Indiana and get signed by San Antonio (and play zero minutes). Johnson played for the worst team in the NBA that was noticeably tanking and Noel the same on the Bucks. I don't think Collins is that talented, but he is probably going to stick in the NBA as an Aaron McKie type role player.
> 
> I think if we looked five years down the road, James White and David Noel probably will not be in the NBA. Johnson will be on his 4th team and Gibson may stick with Cleveland. Still don't think the 2nd to last pick in the first round was bad for Collins, especially if he goes on to have a long term NBA career.
> 
> ...


While I agree with you that he proved to belong in this league, he also had almost four turnovers per game and shot 40 percent from the field over that span. 

The Knicks have done a good job when it comes to maximize their draft picks in the last two years.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

croco said:


> While I agree with you that he proved to belong in this league, he also had almost four turnovers per game and shot 40 percent from the field over that span.
> 
> The Knicks have done a good job when it comes to maximize their draft picks in the last two years.


Agreed. His numbers offered a mixed bag. However he was called on to carry a team trying to make the playoffs with half the team in street clothes and acquitted himself very well. I mean pick 29. Two more selections and that's the 2nd round. Collins can actually stick in the league, which is not something I thought leading up to the draft. However, his play this year at least showed that a) he is not afraid to give a hard foul and be a goon if necessary b) he will probably be a good locker room, team first guy and c) he does bring versatility to the bench position for a guard. 

Heck he gives more value than a John Salmons ever did.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

HKF said:


> Morrison was a bad pick. I was waiting for a full season to go by to say it but man you just knew this guy would be terrible.


I was certainly dissapointed, biggest surprise is i thought he would shoot better. Eerily similar numbers to Rudy Gay though, was he terrible also?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

rainman said:


> I was certainly dissapointed, biggest surprise is i thought he would shoot better. Eerily similar numbers to Rudy Gay though, was he terrible also?


Not even close. Gay wasn't playing many minutes while Fratello was the head coach. Morrison played from the beginning and was horrible all year. He had the worst per of any regular player in the league. He hurt his team more than any other in the league by playing too many minutes. Gay was definitely much better than he was.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

HKF said:


> Not even close. Gay wasn't playing many minutes while Fratello was the head coach. Morrison played from the beginning and was horrible all year. He had the worst per of any regular player in the league. He hurt his team more than any other in the league by playing too many minutes. Gay was definitely much better than he was.



The funny thing is of all the games i saw Morrison play(about 20) he actually looked pretty good, then i'd look at a box score and he was 3 for 18, my biggest concern is whether he can stand up for 82 games because of the diabitis.

As for Gay he started out pretty bad and seemed to find his way as the season went on, like i said his numbers arent any better than Morrison but he did shoot a higher percentage,just wanted to compare the two and be fair and balanced here, i know you would want that, right?


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

rainman said:


> As for Gay he started out pretty bad and seemed to find his way as the season went on, like i said his numbers arent any better than Morrison but he did shoot a higher percentage,just wanted to compare the two and be fair and balanced here, i know you would want that, right?


gay - 27 minutes, 10.8 points, 4.5 rebounds, 1.3 assists, .91 steals, .93 blocks, 42.2% fg, 36.4% from 3, 72.7% ft.

morrison - 30 minutes, 11.8 points, 2.9 rebounds, 2.1 assists, .36 steals, .08 blocks, 37.6% fg, 33.7% from 3, 71% ft.

you wouldn't say that gay's numbers are better than morrison's? gay's numbers aren't great but it looks like it's pretty clear that they are better.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

rocketeer said:


> gay - 27 minutes, 10.8 points, 4.5 rebounds, 1.3 assists, .91 steals, .93 blocks, 42.2% fg, 36.4% from 3, 72.7% ft.
> 
> morrison - 30 minutes, 11.8 points, 2.9 rebounds, 2.1 assists, .36 steals, .08 blocks, 37.6% fg, 33.7% from 3, 71% ft.
> 
> you wouldn't say that gay's numbers are better than morrison's? gay's numbers aren't great but it looks like it's pretty clear that they are better.


I did say his fg% was better(dunkers tend to shoot a higher %) everything else relatively speaking compared to their positions arent much differant, you think they're that much better?


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

rainman said:


> I did say his fg% was better(dunkers tend to shoot a higher %) everything else relatively speaking compared to their positions arent much differant, you think they're that much better?


they aren't a lot better, but they clearly are better.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Gay had a lot of doubters coming out of college, Morrison was a "sure thing".


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

Nimreitz said:


> Gay had a lot of doubters coming out of college, Morrison was a "sure thing".


morrison had his fair share of doubters(or really just people that were right about him).

but morrison was still hyped as one of the most nba ready guys in the draft while gay was expected to take a couple of years before he really became a good player.


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Portland: Jury's still out, but trading Telfair for Roy and getting Aldridge look like A's to me. (I didn't even like Roy that much. oops!)


Just curious about what you think of Sergio, us Blazer fans love him.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Ronnie Brewer had a good rookie season, especially under Sloan.


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

Mebarak said:


> Yup, he salvaged the Bulls draft. The ship was damn near sunk after the #2 pick, guys special.
> 
> As far as the All Rookie teams, I'll say
> 
> ...


You are hereby banned from making any sort of post draft analysis.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

gambitnut said:


> Just curious about what you think of Sergio, us Blazer fans love him.


I won't comment because I haven't seen him enough/at all.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

rainman said:


> I did say his fg% was better(dunkers tend to shoot a higher %) everything else relatively speaking compared to their positions arent much differant, you think they're that much better?


Do dunkers also tend to shoot better from the three point line? Also, on an absolute basis, Gay shot jumpers at a better clip than Morrison.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Well, I lined up the teams in order of who I thought came out best today and then assigned REAL grades. I noticed Chad Ford didn't give a single D and like 8 A's and that really made me mad. I didn't grade teams who only grabbed second rounders because they tend to not make much difference, and for the most part second rounders aren't taken into consideration at all. The one thing that might cause you to dislike a particular grade was my odd standard. Basically I asked myself "how much better are they today than they were yesterday?"
> 
> Memphis A+
> Portland A
> ...





Nimreitz said:


> Let's assess.
> 
> Memphis: A little too high on Gay, but still a good value pick considering his talent to the other rookies and where he was picked. Trading Battier doesn't look as smart though. Lowry was a good pick. Also got Johnson in the second round who had an impressive campaign for where he was picked.
> 
> ...


2 Years down, let's continue analyzing.

Memphis: Rudy Gay and Kyle Lowry still look like A territory to me. Outside of arguably Roy, Gay is the best player in the draft.
Portland: My other A. Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge. Duh.

Chicago: Not as clear as it was after last year that TT and Sefolosha are that good, however I didn't give any B+'s, so I think these guys are B's, but I might bump down to B-.
Cleveland: Boobie is still an A for the Second Round, Shannon Brown is a big fat bust. I still think they got what they could out of the draft though, Gibson's a valuable player for them, and I stick with a B.
Boston: Rajon Rondo looks great, Telfair trade not so much. Still think it's a B though with Rondo's emergence.
Charlotte: This still haunts me. I hated Ammo, why did I give them a B!?
Toronto: Bargnani looks like he might be going south of B- territory right now, maybe C+ish.

Minnesota: Foye is maybe B- or B, not the C+ I gave him. Could of had Roy though.
New Orleans: What a horrendous draft. Deserved a D.
Utah: Corey Brewer looks great right now, this is probably the B+ of the draft.
LA Lakers: Farmar's a good player, but nothing more than a C+.
Philly: Carney's nothing special still. Maybe a C- guy.
New Jersey: Still not seeing all the hype over the Williams, Boone, Adams draft.
Atlanta: Sheldon is a big fat D, good move trading him.
Sacramento: Douby's nothing.
Houston: I'm coming around again on my thoughts on the Battier for Gay trade. I said "congrats on getting eliminated in the first round every year for the next 4 years." We're half way there. I imagine Rudy Gay next year on Houston could make a bigger impact than Battier will. So I'd say C.
Orlando: Redick's a D- still. Coming around a little though, but no where near first round level, much less lottery.
Dallas: Ager is still garbage.

Washington: Pecherov who?
Indiana: Shawne has not quite lived up to the hype of some members. Not a BAD player, and probably a C- guy, not a D guy.

Seattle: Sene still an F-.
New York: I'm willing to admit a mistake here and bump them up to a C or C-. They got role players that they needed, but still didn't really make much of a splash.

Accurate projections: 11
Close (by half a grade or so): 3
Off (by about a full grade): 6
Way off: 2

Still looking good!


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Good stuff Nim.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Considering where Williams and Boone were picked, dont you think the Nets did well in that aspect.

Adams was the 52nd pick I believe, the fact that he isnt in the league anymore shouldnt surprise anyone.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Boston: Rajon Rondo looks great, Telfair trade not so much. Still think it's a B though with Rondo's emergence.


The Telfair trade was about Ratliff's contract, just like the first Antoine Walker trade (to Dallas) was about Chris Mills' contract.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

HB said:


> Considering where Williams and Boone were picked, dont you think the Nets did well in that aspect.
> 
> Adams was the 52nd pick I believe, the fact that he isnt in the league anymore shouldnt surprise anyone.


A lot of people called the Nets the Big Winners of the night after drafting Boone and Williams. Those were average picks, and they deserve their C's. In order to get a B you gotta be above average, which means exceeding the expectation of the type of player you would expect to get. The Nets didn't really do that.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

You do know that Josh Boone is the Nets starting power forward right? For a guy picked 22nd or was it 23rd in the draft, thats fantastic value. How many starters are picked that late in the draft?

A guy that can get you 10 and 10 on any given night without a single play run for him. As far as Marcus Williams is concerned, he will never blossom under Frank's tutelage. For every good game he has, Frank benches him for the next five.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Nimreitz said:


> Well, I lined up the teams in order of who I thought came out best today and then assigned REAL grades. I noticed Chad Ford didn't give a single D and like 8 A's and that really made me mad. I didn't grade teams who only grabbed second rounders because they tend to not make much difference, and for the most part second rounders aren't taken into consideration at all. The one thing that might cause you to dislike a particular grade was my odd standard. Basically I asked myself "how much better are they today than they were yesterday?"
> 
> Memphis A+
> Portland A
> ...





Nimreitz said:


> Let's assess.
> 
> Memphis: A little too high on Gay, but still a good value pick considering his talent to the other rookies and where he was picked. Trading Battier doesn't look as smart though. Lowry was a good pick. Also got Johnson in the second round who had an impressive campaign for where he was picked.
> 
> ...





> 2 Years down, let's continue analyzing.
> 
> Memphis: Rudy Gay and Kyle Lowry still look like A territory to me. Outside of arguably Roy, Gay is the best player in the draft.
> Portland: My other A. Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge. Duh.
> ...


I started to type everything out here, but I just want to highlight a few things now that we're 3 years in.

Rondo is the best value pick of the draft, so the Celtics would get an A if it wasn't for the whole Telfair fiasco. And honestly, Rondo's success outweighs anything bad they did.

The Nets still had a bad draft HB!!!! Marcus Williams played NINE GAMES this year!

Saer Sene isn't even a basketball player, who could have ever predicted that?

Pecherov and Shawne Williams? Jesus Christ.

JJ Redick, Mo Ager, Sheldon Williams, Patrick O'Bryant, Cedric Williams, Adam Morrison, and Hilton Armstrong: LOL

Battier trade is starting to look sparkling for both teams.

Bulls draft depends on Ty Thomas, and he's no where close to finished developing. He could still go in any number of directions with his career.

Come on Bargnani! You can do it!

Portland had the best draft we will ever see. They basically went in with the #4 pick, and came out with LaMarcus Aldridge and Brandon Roy. So nasty.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Boston basically sold their #1 pick for $11 million, and used the insurance policy they traded for to acquire Garnett, so I think we can securely give them an accidental A+.


----------

