You guys understand we are not drafting a team that just looks good on paper right?...

These guys are supposed to start a team and play together, all starting from their prime.

As Assani has already mentioned - this does not mean Stockton or Malone are going to be putting up the same numbers they were putting up throughout their respective careers (as they wont be playing together) If thats the case, we'll be avaeraging 200 points per game - as everyone on our team is going to be a 20ppg guy.

I understand an argument can be made that they would maintain that level of play regardless of who their teammates were - but thats where I strongly disagree.

Stock put up amazing numbers - and was the Big Fundamental before TD took that name over...but its really difficult to see a guy (who would only use his right hand) be as efficient (if not more) than a guy like Chris Paul. It was a different game back then - and Stock and Malone were set in their Jerry Sloan strategy of playing simple, effective basketball. I dont think they would be AS effective in this new age league we are building right now.

You think Bob Cousy wouldve been as great as he was if he were just placed in the 90's to play with that new age NBA? (maybe not the best example - but you see what Im saying here?)

Stats are all well and good - but if you look at the players style (combined with their stats of course), it should be more influential in deciding who would be better suited for this game imo.

I was going to make the standard pick of Barkley or Malone or even Isiah, but why go standard...just because its standard? We're so used to looking back and stating the facts and stats that we're not looking at the possibility.

For a lot of newbies to the NBA - Chris Paul would be an instapick, as he is having one heck of a season this year. As most people who know the history of the NBA, we tend to look down at newbies...but - just becuze the newbie instapicks Paul doesnt mean its the wrong choice. And just because Stock is the obvious pick for NBA Historians, doesnt mean its the right pick.

I guess this whole draft is about who can make a better arguement for their players.

Though I have made an argument in this post (as well as my previous ones) - what I stated first in thsi post should hold true to every GM in this draft...all these guys are actually going to play. They arent going to stand on the court with a sheet of paper with all their stats written out. Lets see how they can play starting from their prime onwards with their new teammates and possibly new style of basketball.

edit: I dont see John Stockton adjusting too well

Agreed 100% The value of the 20th best PF/C in this draft >>>> the value of the 20th best PG. If you take PF late, you still prob end up with someone like Camby/Webber. But @ PG, you're getting stuck w/ Steve Francis or Jamaal Tinsley. Ick. Great Pass first PGs are just sooooo rare.

Also, Malone benefitted from Stockton sooooooo much more than Stock benefitted from Malone. He could of had Kurt Thomas @ PF and still would have averaged 10 apg.

D

Lebron took a bad team the Finals but he didn't have to get through a team like the Celtics or Pistons to win the East like Michael did. Not to mention once you get through the East Magic's Lakers will be waiting for you.

The point of wether Lebron is better at 23 going on 24 than MJ is debatable but their age difference when they came into the league skews that so much so I think a better way to compare is to look at their careers up to this point which would be the first 5 seasons.(First 5 seasons discounting Jordan's 18 game season)Iin that case you gotta go with MJ. In his 3rd full season the guy won MVP of the league over legends like Magic and Bird. In his first 5 seasons he avgd 28, 37, 35, 32 and 33. Lebron has put up great stats in his first 5 seasons also but Jordan has scored more and Jordan also had a season of 32/8/8 and that came in his 4th season compared to Lebron doing a comparable 30/8/7 in his 5th season this year. Jordan won an MVP by his 5th full season and Lebron hasn't. Lebron took a bad team the Finals but he didn't have to get through a team like the Celtics or Pistons to win the East like Michael did. I'd say even Cleveland and Atlanta of that era are better than the teams the Cavs had to get to the Finals last year. What happened to Lebron in the Finals is the same that happenned to MJ in the Eastern Conference Playoffs. Run into an elite team with a one man gang and you'll get killed everytime. It just so happens Lebron didn't run into an elite team until the NBA Finals. I'm guessing Lebron wouldn't have one man banded his team through the western conference playoffs last year he just benefited from a very weak conference.

In Jordan's 6th full season he lead his team to the NBA championship and then proceeded to win the championship in the next 5 full seasons he played also. ! Taking down the Finals MVP in all 6. Lebron enters his 6th full season next year so to keep on pace with Jordan by the 11th full season in his career he will need to have won 6 championships, 5 league MVPs and 6 Finals MVPs. I think people forget the scope of what Jordan did. There is no argument he's the best ever and it's not even really close. Lebron and Kobe are awesome but they aren't better than Jordan at any age or any point of his career.

If you want to talk about a supporting cast MJ never had the most dominating inside force playing in his prime like Kobe did so I don't want to hear anything about supporting casts. Jordan had a good supporting cast, ever championship team does. But it wasn't legendary, Pippen was great but the team wasn't stacked with all-world players by any stretch. They had alot of solid vets and players that knew their role and when you have the best player in the world on your team you honestly don't need all that much help anyway you just need enough.

If you think stockton was a better player than isiah thomas, well, i am speechless.

in my opinion thats like saying clyde drexler was better than jordan or something along that line.

stockton was good but, i doubt anyone has ever seen a little man better than isiah in the nba..i never saw tiny archiabald play..

FTR I would have taken Isiah if I was going to take a point guard there but you obviously are free to pick who you want to pick. I'm just going by the logic if there is a proven legend already out there I'd rather just go with him than someone in their 3rd year that may or not be as good as the legend when it's all said and done. I dunno, it just seems like it's easier to make an argument on a career of achievement than it is over 3 years and speculation and projection. That's all. This is what makes it fun though. If I wanted everyone to think like me and a draft that I agreed completely with I would've just done one with myself. I like seeing other people's ideas and points of view. I think we can all agree/disagree and discuss picks with out getting personal and just have a good time with it.

who are u talkin to?

I agree with this as well. I think picking a PF at this point should be for defensive purposes primarily, and the last two PF's picked weren't the type to anchor a defense. Malone was a great 1v1 defender/rebounder, but wasn't the best help defender. Barkley was a better help defender, but you can argue that he'd have a much worse time defending PF's today because those guys can actually shoot over a 6'4" guy.

I would have taken DHow over both of those guys. In a draft like this, scorers shouldn't be the priority because everyone will be able to draft guys who can do this at every position. DHow is a robo-rebounder who is pretty good as a defensive anchor, and creates more matchup problems than the other two.

Also, I like Stockton over CP3 for that reason, plus I think Stockton was a better jumpshooter (particularly mid-range) and was impossible for a bigger guard to post up due to his strength.

I never saw tiny either but for my lifetime it's between Isiah and AI.

Its all good Biiig, Im not getting personal or anything close to it. Im all about having a good general discussion...and I understand your point.

Im not trying to force everyone to think like me - rather just give my thoughts on this topic.

However - I do stand firm on the last thing I mentioned in that post:

Thats not my own point of view btw - thats what the draft was all about...as stated by Assani when he started it.

This.

Only 16 more all-time greats taken before fanmail is on the clock.

Would you pick a Isaiah over Stockton because he's better though? I think Thomas was the better overall player, but Stockton is the better fit for the purpose of this draft.

Lebron had to go through an elite team...the Pistons, and Lebron destroyed them single handedly. Everyone was saying they were elite this year, well they basacally have the same team they had last year except one year older with a slightly stronger bench.

And also, huge lol @ not comparing Lebron to Michael in terms of age, but in terms of years in the league. Like seriously wtf? I'm speachless. Lebron has been better up to this point in his career age wise compared to Michael, if that will continue who knows, but Lebron certainly has the potential to make sure it does, its up to him if he does it or not.

And Kobe played with Shaq when Kobe wasn't in his prime, and they still won a bunch of Championships in a short period of time.

I would pick isiah because i would want points. i think that isiah would dominate at the pg position when matched up with any pg in history.

i can find pretty much anyone to facilitate my offense (keeping names to myself, may need to pick them later)

i just know this... isiah was a great shooter, and if you came up on him.. he was gone.. and he was tough... he was the definition of unstopable. magic may of been the best pg ever but, he could not stop isiah.

isiah was a terrible gm but that does not take away that he was the best little guy i ever seen.

i originally was not talking to anyone in particular. i was just amazed that some think that stockton was better than isiah.

No he wasn't! His midrange game was pretty good, but he was a pretty bad three point and FT shooter. He also pretty much led the league in turnovers every year and averaged 1 more than Stockton on less assists. And Stockton was a much better defender.

Let's not overrate the guy.

The argument seems to lean that any of theses changes would stymie MJ's greatness that he has no adaptability. Yet that was the key thing that made Jordan great that I think really is lacking in some of today's talent. His ability to adapt to the game was unbelievable and to focus on his weakness and keep the mentality of a ultimate competitor.

Good point, I mitght be looking to play Barkley at the 3 (not sure if he actually did this) and get another PF. On the other hand, a lot of the players selected will be from Barkley's time, not the current NBA. It kind of depends on what the composition of people's teams turns out to be, as in the NBA today, teams are going with smaller and smaller line-up. I mean if you're looking at true classic centers there's Yao, Dwight, Duncan, Oden (maybe) and not much else

seadood:

were you actually WATCHING the games or reading the stat line ?? i have been watching isiah since he was at indiana when he led indiana to the title as a sophomore and made the pistons relevent not to mention leading them to 2 titles.

the only way you could "overrate" isiah thomas as a basketball player is to say he was the greatest player of all time, when everyone knows that is jordan.

i am happy to direct you to some footage of isiah when he was unstopable and dominated the game, imposing his will on the game while being the smallest and the toughest guy on the court.

stockton was good, but, he was no isiah.

i just thought of a boxing analogy.. to me its like comparing sugar ray leonard, who was a great fighter (like stockton) to sugar ray robinson (isiah) who was better.

best pgs i ever seen... 1) magic 2) isiah..


hey guys, let me have isiah

Both. What's your point? Do the stats lie? They are much more accurate than watching the game, you know. And I'm not arguing that Stockton is better than Thomas. What I am arguing is that he wasn't a good shooter, and had a lot of turnovers.

Correct. People assume Jordan wouldn't adjust. My guess is that he'd average more assists, and be a better 3 point shooter since that's more the focus these days.

Umm, I'm pretty sure this is Assani's thread and idea, so he can do what he wants. And since he's already indicated that he wants the cutoff to be 40, you should stop acting like a controlling dick.

Man this thread got off to such a good start, but it's gotten lamed up hard the past couple pages.

surprise surprise someone overrates Isiah based on "little man" and "fighter" analogies.

Stockton pwns Isiah.

Shark,

Stockton played into this decade and put up a 20 PER as a 40 year old. I think he can hang in today's game just fine.

this has got to be one of the dumbest points ever made. Yeah my eyes are a way better gauge of FG% than the stat lines.

Yeah. Everyone knows Iverson is the greatest "little man." Come on HAVE YOU SEEN HIM PLAY!

[edit] Also, drafting Iverson at ANY point in this draft would be a horrible decision, FWIW.

lol...


isiah vs stockton .. isiah gets 50

btw.. isiah is better than iverson

i am tired of talking about this.. but it AMAZES me that someone could use the words Isiah Thomas and overrated in the same sentence.

one last thing.. i SAW isiah dominate games by himself.. don't recall watching stockton dominate and take games over.


LEAVE ISIAH FOR ME TO DRAFT... PLEASE

damn, i should of kept my mouth shut. now isiah is gone

i am not saying anything else about players until the rosters are set. lol..lol