# Draft Busts



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

I was watching the Cavs game on TV last night and the thought hit me. Right now, on the court we have all three of our first draft picks this last year. Not only were they on the court, they were leading the charge, carrying the load and pretty much running the show.

Sergio was manning the point. He can push the ball or he can slow it down and work a half court offense with the pick and roll and drive and dish. Picked at #27, for the cost of cash, this is turning out to be the steal of the draft in my book. How many times have you heard that it takes Point guards the longest time to really understand the NBA game and adjust. How it takes time for them to be able to lead a team? Sergio's been playing a half a year. Already when he comes into the game you can feel it. He might be a bench player but damn if the bench isn't fun to watch because of him. the commentators were right. the tempo changes when he's on the court. We get more open looks, more and ones more fast breaks.

The thought hit me while sergio collected the pass from a rebound and pushed the ball up the court. He ran but before he passed half court he had already passed the ball the the player way up at the other base line. none of our point guards have done that for ages. They would maybe run it up but typically it was a walk up pace. Not so with Sergio. Run and Gun. I like it. Oh did you notice he had 0 turnovers last night? thats a nice assist to turnover ratio of 9/0 hot damn.

LaMarcus is just plain solid. I might get bashed for this, but I like him at Center. Yea he's not as tall as some, but he's quick. He plays good defense and he is steady with the 15 foot jumper. He's done a good job of being a garbage player. Going after loose balls and trying to put them back in. He's got smarts and cuts to the hoop without the ball, sometime our athletic players like Miles and Outlaw should do when they dont have the ball and someone else is double teamed.

While his stat sheet might not reflect all his work, so many times he "almost" had a loose ball and just missed or it bounced the other way he is still filling in the stat sheets and staying in games. He has great hands and extends well. Pick and rolls and pick and pops with him and sergio or brandon are going to be something you hear a lot of in the future.

Brandon Roy is clearly Rookie of the Year. It's a shame that he had that injury otherwise he would be the unquestioned leader for the ROY honors. He plays like a vet, he starts for the team, teammates respect him and know he plays smart. I read or heard someone comment about how he doesn't push it unless he has to. He's got athletic ability and is a complete player, but he's also a team player. 19 points, 10 rebounds, 6 steals, 4 assists, 5 rebounds.....He pretty much did everything.

He's fearless taking it to the paint, strong enough to finish and can do so with either hand. He's got a decent outside shot and can hit the three. Opponents already respect him and place some of their better players on him to stop him.

These young players are clearly the future of the Blazers. it's a pretty bright one, that is if it is the future. In many respects it's not the future. it's the present. Add in the resurgence of Zach and the tenacity of Ime and you have a pretty great group right there.

i'm not discounting Jack, martel, miles, outlaw or anyone else on the team. But when I looked at those three I could see the future of portlands game right there. I'm excited. I know that we all discount Miles as a headcase and figure he wont ever be back in a blazer uni. But he is a quality player when he wants to be. He's easily the best SF we have when he's mentally in it.

Here's your Starting 5 - 
Sergio (speed, passing, control)
Brandon (playmaking, solid does everything)
Miles (athletic, defense, creates own shot)
Zach (post player, rebounder, Power player)
LaMarcus (defense, scoring, speed)

That is an athletic, running, beat you up team. Zach doesn't need to sprint down because you have brandon, miles and LaMarcus who can push the ball. Zach can be the secondary break anchor. You have swiftness and passing. You have players who can create their own shot. you have above the rim finishers and you have defense. Miles was one of our best players at steals last year. I think with this group Zach will run. He will see everyone else getting easy shots and will be on board for getting some of his own as well. Before you freak out, this is all with the players we have currently on contract. This isn't speculation of what we could get or who we might draft. This is purely trying to make the best out of what we have.

I can see just about everyone else as role players for different things. 
Jack - heady defender
Jamaal - Inside bruiser
Martel - Outside shooter
Travis - Athleticism
Juan - Quick Scoring
Joel - Blocked shots

I see the makings of a great team in the future. a fun team to watch. Last nights game was just plain fun.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

This team will NEVER win with Miles on it. As far as Zach is concerned, this TEAM would be better off without him as well.


----------



## wizmentor (Nov 10, 2005)

I like your enthusiasm, but the implication must be then, that
Travis and Martel are draft busts.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

wizmentor said:


> I like your enthusiasm, but the implication must be then, that
> Travis and Martel are draft busts.



Travis was a late first round pick which generally end up fading out of the league. So you can't really call Travis a bust whether he achieves all-star status or not. Martell on the other hand was the 6th overall pick last year and thus far hasn't shown the worthiness of that pick, although high school players generally don't a year and a half into their NBA careers. He has shown flashes and I do believe he will pan out once he gets some plays ran for him and becomes more confident.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I won't mince words. I am genuinly concerned that Martell has not improved to the point he has won significant playing time on this roster. He has games where he tears it up, sometimes scoring in the teens in a single quarter. Then he has games like last night, where he is a doughnut with 3 rebounds and several defensive mistakes. A lot of people will say that is because he is young, and I hear you. But it still concerns me, because some of the guys playing ahead of him, really aren't that good. 

As for Travis, he has taken 4 years to become below average. I think that says it all. He has is freakishly athletic, but has small hands so he can't take advantage of it. Several seasons with Cheeks as a coach did not help.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

wizmentor said:


> I like your enthusiasm, but the implication must be then, that
> Travis and Martel are draft busts.


No not draft busts at all. Travis has been a high school player who has taken a while to mature. I can see him ultimately taking Miles place on the roster at SF. as for martell, he's struggled with his shot, but I can totally see him coming in off the bench and playing solid minutes, particular as a 3 point shooter with Sergio kickin ghte ball.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> This team will NEVER win with Miles on it. As far as Zach is concerned, this TEAM would be better off without him as well.


I don't think they can win with miles leading the team. But they /could/ with him on it. provided the right pieces were in place with him. Brandon, Sergio and Lamarcus look like they could be those pieces.

that is not to imply that we are building the team around Miles. Hell no.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> This team will NEVER win with Miles on it. As far as Zach is concerned, this TEAM would be better off without him as well.


The team won't ever start Miles again. He's not good enough (all around) or consistent enough (period) to do it when he's healthy, but he sure as **** ain't gonna be that coming back from an injury that takes at least 2 years to get back to normal by someone who HAS a work ethic.

Miles is like Terrell Brandon (minus the fact that Terrell is a decent human being and not a waste of skin). Done.

MM, check your PM box.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I honestly believe we will never see Darius Miles in a Blazer uniform playing in a game ever again.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

rx2web said:


> No not draft busts at all.


Martell is absolutely a bust so far. Compared to the high school players taken in the top 10 the last few years, he's terrible. You don't spend the #6 pick on a guy that's that is showing as little improvement as he has. I'm incredibly sick of the "he's only 20" or "he'd be a senior in college" arguments that we keep hearing for young players that never seem to emerge. You either have it or you don't. Don't judge talent by age, but from what you see on the court. In that respect, Martell has only shown a streaky 3-pointer, below average ball handling and so-so defense. I don't see him having the talent to create his own shot, which is what we need desperately.

You need to cut your losses at some point.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I don't believe it is time to "Cut your losses" with Martell. What I do believe needs to happen is the Blazers need to devote resources like Bill Baino to him asap, and see a commitment for improvement from him, and stress that. Part of the problem with Martell that I see a lot is he seems more concerened for the flair in his game than actual effect. If you watch him in shootaround before the game, all he does is practice trick shots of extreme difficulty, and 3 pointers. You see this translate to the game in the fact he often makes situations much more difficult then he has to. I guess these are all things that you can attribute to youth, but put it this way, I see a lot of guys come into the league young that care more about actual playing effectiveness then how cool their play looked. I still believe Martell can be a deadly offensive force in the league, but he has to start caring about his level of play before that will happen. He has to start caring about why he is not getting playing time, and become concerned enough with it that he actually improves his game and gains some consistency.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

So late first round picks usually fade out?
Like... Terry Porter
Steve Nash
Sergio?
Michael Finley
Tayshaun Prince
Speedy Claxton
Leandro Barbosa
Andrei Kirilenko
Devean George


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

hasoos said:


> I don't believe it is time to "Cut your losses" with Martell.


He definitely needs something. The problem is that I think college might have been the only rout for him to develop the skills he needs. He needs a lot of work on the fundamentals of hall handling and individual defense. But the practices on an NBA team seem to focus on running set plays. You are just assumed to have the tools to succeed at the NBA level at this point. 

How long has Outlaw been working on those fundamentals while on an NBA roster? TO is still as inconsistent as they come several years down the road. Let's learn our lesson from his modest development. Don't fall so love with the mythical "upside" that you can't see you've just for an average player on your hands.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

crandc said:


> So late first round picks usually fade out?
> Like... Terry Porter
> Steve Nash
> Sergio?
> ...


For every one of those guys, there's 10 wash outs. Bad logic.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Am I the only one who shudders at the thought of Miles ever setting foot on the court with our Blazers again? I would rather let him walk away for nothing than let him get within 10 feet of Roy, Aldridge and Rodriguez.

As for Webster, it's truly sad. The kid just is not an NBA player at this point. Maybe he will be someday, but right now his game is more shaky than Dolly Parton's bosom.


----------



## BIG Q (Jul 8, 2005)

craigehlo said:


> Martell is absolutely a bust so far. Compared to the high school players taken in the top 10 the last few years, he's terrible. You don't spend the #6 pick on a guy that's that is showing as little improvement as he has. I'm incredibly sick of the "he's only 20" or *"he'd be a senior in college"* arguments that we keep hearing for young players that never seem to emerge. You either have it or you don't. Don't judge talent by age, but from what you see on the court. In that respect, Martell has only shown a streaky 3-pointer, below average ball handling and so-so defense. I don't see him having the talent to create his own shot, which is what we need desperately.
> 
> You need to cut your losses at some point.


Actually, he would be a sophomore. I am sure he will continue to improve. I would not give up on JO, KG or Kobe this early. What did T-Mac do in his secong season? Nobody ever thought Rtavis would pan out, and since he has been out injured I feel this team has missed him a lot.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

I think much of Martells shooting problems come in the style of play that we have been focused into. the dump it into Zach and let everyone else stand around till zach has three men on him and he either puts it up or passes out just doesn't lend itself, the way we are doing it to getting our shooters open. Because it's expected. You can see it coming 1000 miles away.

However when Sergio is in the game and our style shifts. Zach can still be a focus but he isn't the only focus. That gets our guys on the outside like Ime, Dixon and Martell shots that are more open then normal. I think if we saw this happening more and more, the shots would start dropping. So many of martells shots are in and out. they want to go down but don't. I'm in no way ready to give up on martell just yet.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

craigehlo said:


> Martell is absolutely a bust so far. Compared to the high school players taken in the top 10 the last few years, he's terrible. You don't spend the #6 pick on a guy that's that is showing as little improvement as he has. I'm incredibly sick of the "he's only 20" or "he'd be a senior in college" arguments that we keep hearing for young players that never seem to emerge. You either have it or you don't. Don't judge talent by age, but from what you see on the court. In that respect, Martell has only shown a streaky 3-pointer, below average ball handling and so-so defense. I don't see him having the talent to create his own shot, which is what we need desperately.
> 
> You need to cut your losses at some point.


call me crazy, but "some point" usually is later than halfway through his 2nd year when he's already leading the team in 3 point fg %.

but yah, we should give up on him already. What good player hasn't taken less than 120 games to arrive?


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

BIG Q said:


> I would not give up on JO, KG or Kobe this early. What did T-Mac do in his secong season?



Webster
1st year: 6.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg, .06 ast
2nd year: 7.2 ppg, 2.7 rpg,.08 ast

T-Mac
1st year: 7.1 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 1.5 ast
2nd year: 9.4, 5.7 rpg, 2.3 ast

Kobe
1st year: 7.6 ppg, 1.9 rpg,1.3 ast
2nd year: 15.4 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 2.5 ast

Webster really isn't showing much year to year improvement in comparison to some of the guys you bring up.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

To a degree I think we have lost focus on my point about the players and the team. It's disolved into a martell bust debate. Sure I would like to have him have shown more progress and claimed a starter roll like Brandon or shown the promise that Lamarcus and sergio seem to show in their first season. But I'm also content to let him continue to develop. He might not be a Starter, but that doesn't mean he won't be an excellent 3 point shooting specialist. I'm content to wait a while longer with him. Keep him developing and use him in a supporting role. We cannot possibly have a roster of starters. there would be 7+ guys who would be pissed off.

We need solid role players as well.

Much like Ime, I think that some of martells progress isn't showing up in the box score just yet. It seems that when he's in the game he's trying very hard. He's taking the open 3's they just aren't always falling. He's driving to the hoop, often called for an Offensive foul, but he's being aggressive. I notice him in the mix for rebounds which is a plus, we just have other guys who are sucking them up more.

*All this said, I like the future of our team. I think it looks really good. Looking at the court last night I saw not one, not two, but THREE 1st round rookies from the last draft out playing one of the better teams in the east. They were holding their own and owning the court. You cannot tell me you aren't excited to see Roy, Aldridge, and Rodriguez out on the court at the same time, it's fun plain and simple.*


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Martell Webster, 
Rebounding in 2006:

November: 2.4 rebounds per game
December: 2.7 rebounds per game
January: 3.4 rebounds per game

I know that doesn't seem like much improvement, but one of my main concerns with Martell was his propensity to hang out in the corner. Seems like he's swooping in for boards now, as well.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

craigehlo said:


> For every one of those guys, there's 10 wash outs. Bad logic.


I wonder if anyone has ever done an analysis to compare how players taken at different points in the draft panned out. For example, how players taken 9 - 14 compare to players taken 15 - 20. I'm sure there is a huge variation, but statistically it would be interesting. It seems like there are always players taken 9 - 14 that end up being total busts. It's usually some big center (you can't teach height afterall) that a team takes a chance on in the hope that they will pan out - or occasionally a freakish athlete with huge "upside" but no current skills.

For example, Golden State took Todd Fuller with the 11th pick in the 1996 draft. In doing so, they passed on Kobe Bryant, Peja Stojakovic, Steve Nash, Jermaine O'Neal and Zydrunas Ilgauskas.

Yinka Dare is an example of a bust who kinda fit both categories - a big center and an unskilled athlete (taken 14th in 1994).

Of course, there is no guarantee that the players taken after them will pan out any better, but it just seems that alsmost every year there is some big man or other "project" taken late in the lottery that ends up a bust (or at least never comes close to living up to their lofty draft status - see, Adonal Foyle, Etan Thomas, Cherokee Parks, etc.). There is just something about that area of the draft that sees to entice GMs to roll the dice and take a chance. It's not like they are blowing a top three pick. So, they seem more willing to take a chance and hope it pays off (and it often does - Amare Stoudemire, Dirk Nowitski, etc.). 

Players taken in the 15 - 20 range (or even the low 20s) often seem to develop into solid role players. Not necesarily superstars, but an occasional starter and maybe a 6th or 7th man seem to be taken in this range. I guess the expectations are different. Once you're out of the lottery, perhaps teams are more willing to settle for a solid "known" commodity and draft a guy they think will be solid, but nothing really special. I guess the difference is nobody expects to get a franchise player in this range. So, they gamble less and make a solid choice rather than rolling the dice on a project in hopes of hitting a long shot. 

In any case this is all just speculation based on gut instinct. A complete analysis may prove me totally wrong, but when discussing draft busts it would be interesting to see just what part of the draft is most likely to yield disappointing results and what area of the draft produces the most pleasant surprises. 

BNM


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

rx2web said:


> *All this said, I like the future of our team. I think it looks really good. Looking at the court last night I saw not one, not two, but THREE 1st round rookies from the last draft out playing one of the better teams in the east. They were holding their own and owning the court. You cannot tell me you aren't excited to see Roy, Aldridge, and Rodriguez out on the court at the same time, it's fun plain and simple.*


So, why did you title your thread "Draft Busts"? Just curious as the title doesn't seem to match the point you are trying to make.

BNM


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

Samuel said:


> I know that doesn't seem like much improvement, but one of my main concerns with Martell was his propensity to hang out in the corner. Seems like he's swooping in for boards now, as well.


That's been one of the few bright spots in Martell's game. He isn't scared to mix it up for a defensive board.

My biggest concern with him is that he doesn't have the skills to be a slashing scorer. If we are looking for a role player to hit a 3 off the bench, we should draft a guy like Kompono or Matt Carrol. Both were much further down from the 6th pick in their classes.

Let's face it, he had a great workout and duped the Blazers into taking him way too early. It's ever worse that we passed on some franchise PGs in the process.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Boob-No-More said:


> it would be interesting to see just what part of the draft is most likely to yield disappointing results and what area of the draft produces the most pleasant surprises.


http://www.thedraftreview.com/

As of 1/18, 
Portland would have the 8th pick in the draft.

You can sort by other picks per year elsewhere.

http://www.thedraftreview.com/


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I just want to see Martell do well. I keep hoping the best for him, and every once in a few games he gives me a glimmer of hope. The one thing that keeps my attitude up about him, is the some guys like Outlaw, really didn't even get to play their first few years. At least he earns some time. 

Also for the above statement about Zbo's offense, I agree Zbo's slow down half court game hurts a lot of the other players on the team. I believe they defer too much and stand around too much when they should be moving.


----------



## gatorpops (Dec 17, 2004)

Concerning Martell as a posiblle bust - last night he took a corner three and then the camera cut to Nate and the little twitch in the corner of Nate's mouth showed either irritation or concern or so it seemed. Sergio had set him up well and Matell just missed the shot. My guess was it was Nate's concern for Martell. The thought came to my mind that Nate was concered with Martell's confidence. The camera also closed in on Martell's face and you can almost see the lack of confidence he is experiening. 

I agree with the poster that suggested that he needed some Bano (sp)help. The kid has lost his confidence. There is no reason in my mind that he should not hit most of those shots. 

It is a little like Zack's shooting slump of the last two games but Martell's slump has lasted much longer and he just can't seem to find the consistency.

Give him some time, he is going to be a great shooter in this league. Wasn't I right about Sergio?:biggrin: 

gtorpops


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

I think a lot of it, to be honest, has to do with the roles (or lack thereof) setup by Nate McMillan. In a rebuilding system such as ours, it seems the only gameplan is to dump it into our most prolific scorer. Beyond that, shots are mostly up for grabs. Sure, Nate may ask Roy to 'be more aggressive' one night, but that's about it.

This is why you see guys like Outlaw or Martell go to Phoenix or San Antonio and thrive. They have such a system in place that the players have no question as to their role. There's 'the man', the 'supporting cast', and then role players. 

In Portland, that will probably change over time. LaMarcus will be the man, Roy and our pick this summer will be the supporting cast, and guys like Martell will fill the holes that are left.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Samuel said:


> Portland would have the 8th pick in the draft.


Yikes, that's scary. Only three Hall of Famers on that list (Yardley from 1950, Sam Jones from 1957 and Robert Parish from 1976. More recent years have been loaded with total busts (Randy White, Bo Kimble, Mark Macon, Shawn Respert, Adonal Foyle, Rafael Araujo, etc.) at the 8th pick. Man, this pick almost seems to be jinxed. Oh well, a few decent players have been picked there, too. Just seems like a lot more bad than good at number 8 over the last 30 years.

BNM


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

Here's the high schoolers taken in the 2004 & 2005 draft 1st rounds:

Martell Webster, Josh Smith, JR Smith, Shawn Livingston, Andrew Bynum, Gerald Green, Dwight Howard, Robert Swift (injured this year), Al Jefferson & Sebastian Telfair.

Of all those, I'd argue that Martell has been given ample opportunities to develop and has done the least with it. I root for the kid, but he's not showing the ability to play on the NBA level. Meanwhile most of his peers are leaving him in the dust.


----------



## Blazers2121 (Oct 5, 2006)

Talkhard said:


> Maybe he will be someday, but right now his game is more shaky than Dolly Parton's bosom.


Lmao. 
Yeah, I'm a little disappointed with Webster's inconsistency as well, but I do believe he'll come around, he's a great shooter. What a sight it'd be to see 3 blazer rookies make the rookie team this year, that'd be awesome...I don't even remember the last time a blazer made the rookie team.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

well miles if you listened to the quick chat isnt liked by his teammates and was kicked out of practice last week, maybe even already gotten into it with Roy. The team i with will force a buy out or retirement plus it doesnt sound like miles is rehabing his knee very well.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

I think there's a good chance that Miles' playing career is over ala Mashburn. He could also end like Szczerbiak, not being able to play more than few games in a row. Either way, we should be looking toward a contract buyout with Miles.

Same goes for Reaf. Let's take a lesson from the 76ers see if we can get him off the books like they did with Webber. They clear cap space and saves 5 million over the life of the contract.


----------



## rx2web (Jul 27, 2004)

Boob-No-More said:


> So, why did you title your thread "Draft Busts"? Just curious as the title doesn't seem to match the point you are trying to make.
> 
> BNM


In my enthusiasm I failed to put in the post...that our draft picks aren't going to be busts. They are a very bright future.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

top 10 HS players in the last 10 years

1996 
-none-

1997
#9 Tracey McGrady (22.8ppg, 5.4rpg, 6.3apg)

1998
-none-

1999
#4 Jonathon Bender (out of league)

2000
#3 Darius Miles (done?)

2001
#1 Kwame Brown (8.7ppg, 6.6rpg, 1.2bpg)
#2 Tyson Chandler (6.3ppg, 11.2rpg, 1.6bpg)
#4 Eddie Curry (19.1ppg, 7.3rpg, .6bpg)
#8 DeSanga Diop (2.1ppg, 4.7rpg, 1.4bpg)

2002
#9 Amare Stoudemire (18.2ppg, 9.2rpg, 1.5bpg)

2003
#1 Lebron James (26.8ppg, 6.7rpg, 6.1apg)

2004
#1 Dwight Howard (17.4ppg, 12.6rpg, 1.9bpg)
#4 Shaun Livingston (9.7ppg, 3.4rpg, 5.6apg) 

2005
#6 Martell Webster (7.2ppg, 2.7rpg, 39.6% 3pt)
#10 Andrew Bynum (7.9ppg, 5.8rpg, 1.7bpg)


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

2nd year numbers
McGrady 9.3ppg
Bender 3.3ppg
Miles 9.5ppg
Brown 7.4ppg
Chandler 9.2ppg
Curry 10.5ppg
Diop 1.5ppg
Stoudemire 20.6ppg
James 27.2ppg
Howard 15.8ppg
Livingston 5.8ppg
Bynum 7.9ppg
Webster 7.2ppg

Really only 3 of those guys had really really good 2nd years.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

Schilly said:


> top 10 HS players in the last 10 years


Most of those top 10 guys are big men. It may be a better comparison to stack him against the SG/SF high school prospects in the 1st round.

2003-2005 Draft:

Lebron James 26.8 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 6.2 ast (40.6 mpg)
JR Smith 16.2 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 1.7 ast (29.0 mpg)
Josh Smith 13.1 ppg, 8 rpg, 3.3 ast, 2.7 bpg (36.8 mpg)
Travis Outlaw 9.3 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 0.8 ast (24.5 mpg)
Gerald Green 8.7 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 0.8 ast (18.3 mpg)
Martell Webster 7.2 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 0.8 ast (21.5 mpg)
Ndudi Ebi 5.2ppg, 2.8rpg, 1.2 ast (14 mpg)

Martell's production isn't too hot considering the playing time he's getting and his draft position. Aside from LeBron, he's the highest pick amongst these players.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Is Martell a draft bust? I'll give you my answer in two more years (Jan 2009). He's just too young to know yet. It's got to be both inner desire to be better and aptitude to become better.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

BIG Q said:


> Actually, he would be a sophomore. I am sure he will continue to improve. I would not give up on JO, KG or Kobe this early. What did T-Mac do in his secong season? Nobody ever thought Rtavis would pan out, and since he has been out injured I feel this team has missed him a lot.


JO was stuck behind Sabonis, Rasheed, Brian Grant and others on the depth chart. Even still, in his limited minutes, he showed more game than Webster has to this point.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealje01.html

KG. You are kidding right? KG was decent from year 1. His next 3 seasons he showed significant improvement each year.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html

Kobe struggled his first season....and still managed to be almost "average" statistically. His next year he made a big leap.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01.html

McGrady as a rookie was actually better than Kobe as a rookie. Nobody noticed because of Vince Carter getting all the press. His sophmore year he made a big improvement statistically, AS WELL as being a defensive stopper for his team.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mcgratr01.html

All of these guys showed WAAAAAAAAY more game (even if a lot of Jermaine's was during practice) at the same point in their careers than Martell. Bad example.

As for Travis Outlaw. Now you are hoping the 6th pick in the draft - the guy we passed on Chris Paul and Deron Williams for to nab, might develop to be as "good" as Outlaw? Yikes.

Can someone find an example of a player entering the NBA young (19 or 20), being very mediocre their first 2 years, then either blowing up or improving bit by bit, to become a well above average player?

Here are some that don't exactly fit:
Dirk was bad his rookie year, improved a lot his sophmore year.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nowitdi01.html

Steve Nash was bad his rookie year, improve a lot his sophmore. Was traded to Dallas, was bad again his 3rd and 4th seasons the blew up. (I think for his 3rd and 4th seasons he had injury issues, plus new coach and system might have messed him up as a pg).
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nashst01.html

Chauncey Billups, showed early promise at times. Other times looked bad. Bounced around several teams. Had an injury. Didn't put it all together til he went to Detroit.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/billuch01.html

Many candidates were rejected as the standard and very common situation for young players that end up being worthwhile in the NBA is struggle rookie season, make big improvement sophmore, continue to improve after that. But there is usually a big jump that 2nd season where they show something - prove they can play at a high level.

The closest I could find among active players:
Joe Johnson. Wasn't actually that good until his contract year (4th season). Played well. I supposed he realized it was better to try hard and be good, than to suck, and he has been good every since. Maybe that will happen to Martell?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsjo02.html

So, we have one example.

Sorry Blazer fans. Most NBA players show they can PLAY by this point. There is still a chance Martell will end up better than average (he has a ways to go before he is even average), but the odds of that happening to a HUGE hit by his lack of improvement over his rookie season. It is not a good pattern.


----------



## TheBlueDoggy (Oct 5, 2004)

craigehlo said:


> Martell is absolutely a bust so far. Compared to the high school players taken in the top 10 the last few years, he's terrible. You don't spend the #6 pick on a guy that's that is showing as little improvement as he has. I'm incredibly sick of the "he's only 20" or "he'd be a senior in college" arguments that we keep hearing for young players that never seem to emerge. You either have it or you don't. Don't judge talent by age, but from what you see on the court. In that respect, Martell has only shown a streaky 3-pointer, below average ball handling and so-so defense. I don't see him having the talent to create his own shot, which is what we need desperately.
> 
> You need to cut your losses at some point.


But Martell is so damn sexy!

Any ways, he's not a streaky 3pt shooter @ over 40%. Considering his minutes have been messed around with so much this season, it would be tough for anyone to get into any rythm. He showed a lot of good stuff just before he hurt his back. He was the league leader in 3pt %, he was showing us a midrange and inside game and a lot of energy. Ever since his back, for whatever reason(s) he's not been the same. Also, I think he leads the club in 3pts made and attempted so, he's not all that bad, especially since he was drafted as a project. Nate said right away last year he didn't even know if Martell could be an NBA player and other negative stuff, and then this year says he'll be great, so that tells you even the coach didn't know what to do with the kid.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

TheBlueDoggy said:


> Any ways, he's not a streaky 3pt shooter @ over 40%.


He's actually under 40% from 3 right now because he's on on a cold streak. He's not even in the top 30 in 3pt percentage right now. If that's his big asset, he's not helping the team very much.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

craigehlo said:


> For every one of those guys, there's 10 wash outs. Bad logic.



Extremely bad logic. But the kind you see everyday from Americans. Lay off the fast food people!


----------



## tempe85 (Jan 7, 2005)

I honestly think the Blazers got 3 of the top 5 players in the draft. That's just crazy to think about. I mean this draft sucked... but the Blazers came away like bandits.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

TheBlueDoggy said:


> He showed a lot of good stuff just before he hurt his back. He was the league leader in 3pt %, he was showing us a midrange and inside game and a lot of energy. Ever since his back, for whatever reason(s) he's not been the same.


I think it has more to do with his attitude 'reacting' to the back injury than his actual back.

Have you heard anything regarding Martell's back since the first weeks of the season? I haven't.


----------



## Ukrainefan (Aug 1, 2003)

Yes, the Blazers had a terrific draft in 2006; no doubt about it!

Unfortunately, for me, it just highlights what bad drafts (under Nash) they had in the previous three years. Travis Outlaw, who I believe does not have the intelligence, inner drive or mental toughness to ever be more than very average; Telfair (undersized and an average shooter and passer), Khyrapa (still a question mark)and Monia (out of the league), and then Webster (good posts by Craigehlo on Webster). Looking back, it's clear just how bad a job Nash did. Going against his own scouts by drafting Telfair was the worst and continued to have repercussions (passing on Chris Paul) in the 2005 draft. 

Anyway, I'm happy he's gone and that Pritchard is now running things; it's just that Nash made our rebuilding process so long that sometimes it's frustrating.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Some high schoolers are taken because they are just so good there is no point in them even going to college(Kobe, Lebron), but there are others who are taken, just because the team is not so enamored with any of the prospects, and they feel if the make a reach, and select a high school prospect, they are making an better investment in the future.

Martell was a big reach at 6, and he was not ready for the NBA. But right now he looks more underdeveloped than over-his-head.

Look at the players taken after him, who do you regret not taking considering our current roster? I can see no one.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

Yega1979 said:


> So
> Look at the players taken after him, who do you regret not taking considering our current roster? I can see no one.


That's crazy talk. I'd rather have any of these guys listed after him. Also don't forget we traded DOWN from #3. Add Paul, DWilliams and Felton to this list.

Charlie Villanueva
Channing Frye 
Ike Diogu 
Andrew Bynum 
Sean May 
Joey Graham 
Danny Granger
Gerald Green
Hakim Warrick 
Francisco Garcia
David Lee
Monta Ellis


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

Yega1979 said:


> Some high schoolers are taken because they are just so good there is no point in them even going to college(Kobe, Lebron), but there are others who are taken, just because the team is not so enamored with any of the prospects, and they feel if the make a reach, and select a high school prospect, they are making an better investment in the future.
> 
> Martell was a big reach at 6, and he was not ready for the NBA. But right now he looks more underdeveloped than over-his-head.
> 
> Look at the players taken after him, who do you regret not taking considering our current roster? I can see no one.


Dude. We had the #3 pick going into that draft.

I regret us not taking Chris Paul. The very same player I regretted us not taking the day of the draft, the day after the draft and many days thereafter.

We could have also had Deron Williams who is looking awesome now.

With hindsight, we could also have drafted Monta Ellis with our 2nd rounder.


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

craigehlo said:


> For every one of those guys, there's 10 wash outs. Bad logic.


How about lottery busts then? That is flawed logic. Just because a player is picked in the lottery doesn't mean he's going to be a superstar, just like it isn't guarenteed a guy in the bottom will be a bum. Look at Gilbert Arenas, one of the league's leading scorers right now. Look at Frederick Weiss, not even in the league. Look back at old Portland drafts. Sam Bowie or John Stockton? Martell Webster or David Lee of the Knicks? At this point Lee has had a far greater impact on his ballclub, and every indication from Martell was supposed to be that he's a "ready shooter." Doesn't mean Martell won't be good though, but I'm just informing you of why that is flawed logic. This is not coming from a "Hater" as I followed the Blazers team with Telfair on it very closely, and still respect the nucleus of players and coaching staff of today.


----------



## craigehlo (Feb 24, 2005)

knicksfan said:


> Just because a player is picked in the lottery doesn't mean he's going to be a superstar, just like it isn't guarenteed a guy in the bottom will be a bum.


Nobody on this thread said that the draft was a guarantee.

The amount of money and resources invested into pro NBA scouting these days makes it less of a risk to draft than ten or twenty years ago. There's more money in the NBA these days therefore teams want to take less of a risk and spend a lot more time scouting players. 

The fact is that in the case of Telfair and Martell, the Blazers were far in love with the idea of upside rather than real world results. We took both players too high and passed on a lot of unglamourous picks in the process. The problem is that we were trying to swing for the fences and get an All-star early, but instead we struck out and ended up with players that have a questionable future. 

Funny thing is as soon as we make picks for good college players like Roy and LaMarcus, suddenly things are looking up. Don't try to overthink the draft or you end up with Darko instead of Mello.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

I had a little time so I did the research on how draft picks pan out.

I used the 1995-2004 drafts. I wanted to avoid results being skewed by either meteors (shine bright a year or so and vanish) or late bloomers (Nash and Nowitzki were once thought of as busts). 

Divided players into 4 categories:

Star: an all star more than once, a top performer on a contender, and/or a player who is recognized as having talent above the level of his NBA peers
Solid: the biggest category, includes players who for at least a few years have been starters or 6th/7th men who make important contributions off the bench, good role players; guys who are good to have on a team but not stellar
Marginal: Manage to hang on for several years because they do one thing well, are big enough to get 6 fouls on Shaq, have compromising pics of team owner, or whatever. Also included players who had a good year or two but then flamed out due to injury or attitude or both.
Busts: Guys about whom you say "who?"; either never played or never did anything


Here is what I found:
Of players taken 1-10, 21% were stars, 52% were solid, 15% were marginal, 12% were busts
Of players taken 11-20, 4% were stars, 38% were solid, 22% were marginal, 38% were busts
Of players taken 21 and up, 11% were stars, 24% were solid, 23% were marginal, 47% were busts

I only ran first round.
Clearly, scouting is good in the NBA as the big majority of top 10 players are solid contributors, but even then a pretty significant number never pan out. I think the very few stars in the 11-20 group is a result of that scouting, players known to be really good are already gone, and the pleasant surprises (i.e. Tony Parker) are the late picks. 
The 21 and up group was a bit distorted in that a lot of the best teams select some guy from overseas whom they know they will never bring over here. 

I can give names of who I put where if anyone is interested. The whole table is too long to copy here.

Just FYI. My $.02.


----------



## Matthew Maurer (Oct 17, 2002)

Samuel said:


> http://www.thedraftreview.com/
> 
> As of 1/18,
> Portland would have the 8th pick in the draft.
> ...


Hey thanks for the love I really appreciate it
Matthew

http://thedraftreview.com/trivia/index.htm

http://thedraftreview.com/2007guide.htm


----------

