I took Horn to be the PG all along. Part of the reason why I didn't take a true PG was that I wanted to take a group of players that were great playmakers at their respective positions. I felt that there was too much value at the other positions to go with a true PG, so I went with a combo guard. If I ended up not taking KG in the first round, things would have been different. I would have been forced to take a true PG somewhere.

Like Tbach said, I'm going to need to find a stopper at the 2-3 in the later rounds, but I had a list of 8 of those guys, but only 3 SF's that fit what I wanted to do.

Ray Allen isn't an alcoholic

Horford/Bynum are 1/2 or 2/1, I can't decide. They're both such bad picks.

Kc,

As usual, awesome job on the links. B-diddy with the triple Easter egg. The mcdonalds clip was killing me. Starburst car!

D

So is Ray Allen basacally, except he went early 2nd round and is suddenly a steal where as Petrovic went late 3rd and he isn't...um ya

I also hope the dying part was a joke

Ok, and I disagree, I think Joe Johnson's D is roughly the same as Schrempf.

He's a PGs size and a SG mentality that dominates the ball. He's extremely talented but I don't think he's a guy I would build my NBA franchise around in this era or any. He's become better but in his prime he was a bulk inefficient scorer who took too many shots and dominated the ball. Yes he made it to the Finals in a horrible east but your going to have to find low usage defensive players. Maybe it's just me but I want a PG that passes first and shoots second, he isn't one of those and to put him at the 2 with an equally short PG is going to be a defensive knightmare.

A) I don't see Marbury being a bad player which obviously makes me a minority on this board. I had his value at around where he got picked and possibly higher. You also have to take into consideration where you think a guy will most likely get picked. I'm sure whoever picked him didn't think he'd be around 'til the 4th round and I would venture to say most people on the board wouldn't think he'd be around in the 4th round.

B) When you are talking about value yeah it matters where a guy is picked. Being selected in the 5th round can be a great pickup for player A but a reach for player B.

strawman. I later admitted Mullin falling that far was ridic.

It's not a lot more likley, that's the point. Just because Detlef did it once, doesn't mean he will do it again. Infact, if you judged Detlef at Joe Johnson's age (26) and said he was more likley to stay healthy than Joe Johnson i'd say ur wrong.

We might as well have just drafted people who were only 30+ years old if you guys are going to drastically underrate younger guys.

Schrempf had a higher career PER than Petrovic. I know PER isn't everything, but Petrovic's career PER only encompasses his age 25-28 seasons - the typical peak period for most players. Schrempf's carrer PER encompasses his age 23-38 seasons. The most compelling ciriticism of PER is its failure to take defense into account. By all accounts, Schrempf was a better defender than Petrovic. It is pretty crazy to argue the Petrovic was as good as Schrempf, or even particularly close.

you're the king of manipulating player's worth to fit your argument. If you think Drazen was ever capable of being a franchise guy like Ray was everywhere before Boston, then you need your head examined.

I actually agree with epipen on this fwiw. People really need to stop paying attention to where injuries happened in real life, and more think about likelihood of injury based upon what happened to a player IRL.

Edit- this = his injury arguments. Not about him thinking that Petrovic is anywhere near Ray. Or that Petrovic and JJ are as good as Schrempf.

Still Ray Allen is not great or bad value where he went but to say he's top 5 in value is LOL in this draft especially when you can take pure shooters now who aren't that much worse than Ray Allen shooting wise (he is amazing but scorers/shooters are a big commodity in the NBA) but can't take defensive stoppers who can score right now.

You can put him at the one or two. Yes you might have to work a little harder when selecting players to put around him but just as a flat out talent and what he did with his career for what he had to work with I don't see 31 players ahead of Allen Iverson. Part of the reason why he took so many shots is because he was on really bad teams. He never had the luxury of playing with another star in his prime like alot of the other players have. As far as the last comment will if you have on short guy, don't start another one at the pg. That's pretty simple to get around.

Petrovic is a better offensive player than Schrempf, that's why you stat geeks with ur PER don't get it sometimes.

And lol @ it being crazy to argue than Petrovic was even particulary close, I will give you that Schrempf might be better than Petrovic, but it IS VERY CLOSE....

Um he was, and he was a franchise guy for the Nets, he completly turned that team around...

+1 ldo

It isn't even an injury argument. Not breaking down after the age of 30 is a huge plus for a player in this. Its not just some random thing that happened. A player who played at a high level until 34 should be given credit for that + aspect of his career.

I'm not saying that Joe Johnson can't play great into his 30s, who knows. But you cannot say he is the same as a guy who already did it. Doing that just totally takes longevity out of the ball game, and it is a very important part of a players career. Saying you don't know JJ will be great at age 32 isn't really a knock on him, but saying that he has the same chance as detlef to be great at age 32 is a huge knock on Detlef and totally makes his longevity meaningless.

Because we have more data on Detlef than JJ shouldn't hurt how you view Detlef, it should hurt how you view the younger player.

I really want to do a WNBA draft now since I realized BRef has stats for them. Who's in baby?

Not many people who were durable break down right after 30, infact its very rare. Even non injury prone/but not durable people have careers later than 30 where they are very productive. Heck EVEN INJURY PRONE people have productive careers past 30 ie. Marcus glassman Camby. And like I said, just because Detleff did it once, doesn't mean he won't break down at 30 in this league, of course it's rare, just like Joe Johnson breaking down at 30 is rare.

You guys act as if people breaking down at 30 (especially people who are somewhat durable) is common, it's not. This isn't a football running back.

Yes Ray Allen has a great jump shot but to label the guy as a shooter only is short changing him. Reggie Miller and Rip Hamilton are two good comparisons to me but I don't think Ray Allen is the same type of player as those two. Ray Allen can get any shot he wants whenever he wants. He can get to the basket and finish better than both of those guys and is a better ball handler than both of those guys. Alot of people are sleeping on Ray Allen. The guy is a flat out baller. He was hidden on the Bucks and in Seattle for most of his career. Has always been on of the most underrated players in the league.

It doesn't have to be a huge injury, when players are on the downside of their career it becomes more difficult for them to be super productive. Its common sense. What the **** are you arguing? That lots of players don't decline after age 30 unless they have a major injury? How about that they are getting old?

Ray getting pinned as a "pure shooter" is BS. Until Boston he was a franchise go-to guy everywhere he played. He created a ton of his own offense. Reggie is the apt comparison, but as BigChips points out, they aren't identical (mainly their inside the arc game is vastly different). I think they're very, very close in terms of value (I personally prefer Ray, other people I respect prefer Reggie). Reggie's a better shooter (from 2pt range only, actually.. 3s and FT are identical), Ray's better at the other stuff.

Maybe he isn't a top 5 value (I agree Mullin is better considering how insanely far he dropped), but he was an awesome pick there.

+ about RA and RM being much more than just shooters.

By what measurnig stick?

Your acting like Petrovic was some sick talent. His best year was 22/2.7r/3.5a/1.3spg 51% from the field and 45% from 3. That's a pretty damn good year at 28 years old. He had 1 more year about equally good. If he could extend this out even then I'm not sure how much better or worse he is than Detlef.

Detlef averaged 17/9.6/5 during a 3 year stretch with indy including around 52% from the field and 35% from 3 point land. Also a TS% around 61.5% and a 19 PER. Detlef was really, really good and in his prime he was a high rebound and high assist guy for his position.