Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
Two Plus Two Forums
Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done

05-20-2008 , 02:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack of Arcades Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
In 02-03, O'Neal had two very efficient players playing along side him. One of them was Reggie Miller ffs.

The problem with O'neal is not just his low fg%. He doesn't do anything else offensively. He can't shoot 3s and he can't shoot free throws. A guy like Reggie Miller "only" shot .441, but he was way more efficient than Jermaine.
What?? This is nonsense, most big men who block shots and rebound well don't shoot 3s. This is like saying you don't like Chris Mullin because he couldn't defend Shaq in the post.

And the fact that he had an aging reggie doesn't mean his team was efficient offensively. The bottom line is that he led his team in scoring with a consistently higher than team-average efficiency.
05-20-2008 , 02:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franchise 60 Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
This is only 2/5ths of my lineup, reaching on a PnR big man just to fulfill that need would have been a horrible decision. Mullin will gel with any lineup.

Mullin is also a very good passer and rebounder for a 3, I really see no downside to the pick. Pairing two extremely efficient players together isn't a negative.

Stockton will also be better at penetrating with the guard friendly rules of todays game.

Now tell me why its not a good fit. Because Mullin isn't a PnR big man? Not buying it.
Can anyone tell me more about Mullin's defense?
05-20-2008 , 02:12 AM
I still think Bynum is by far the worst pick in this draft....yes - that means worse than Starbury...I dont like Steph - but he did have some really good seasons early on....and not just half of a good season like Bynum. And to be honest - Bynum, though he has a lot of potential....he hasnt really even done anything really that remarkable in that one Half-season he played well. He played solid - showed glimpses of potential - but thats it...if he had at least finished off the season maybe we could have a better idea of what to expect from him...but half of a decent season is nothing to drool over.
05-20-2008 , 02:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LurchySoprano Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
After much deliberation, team Lurchy selects Alvin Robertson with the 69th pick of the draft.

A name that will be unknown to most younger NBA fans, Robertson was a player known for his defense and solid all around game. Just how good was his defense you ask? Robertson was the 1986-87 NBA defensive player of the year and was a member of the 1st or 2nd all defensive team on six different occasions.

Robertson has some very impressive stats regarding his defense. He holds the NBA's all time record for steals in a year per game with 3.7 spg in the 85-86 season. In addition, of the top 12 seasons in steals per game, Robertson owns five of them. In addition, his career average of 2.7 spg is the best in NBA history as is his steal %. Also, Robertson owns the distinction of winning NBA DPoY in 85-86 and not making first team all defense.

While Robertson was known for his defense he was no slouch on offense, averaging 14.0ppg, 5.2rpg, and 5.0apg with a eFG% of 49%.

- 4 Time NBA All Star (86, 87, 88, 91)
- 1985-86 NBA Defensive Player of the Year
- 2 Time First Team All Defense (86-87, 90-91)
- 4 Time Second Team All Defense (85-86, 87-88, 88-89, 89-90)
- All NBA Second Team in 1985-86
- Career PER of 17.0
I'm pretty "meh" on this pick. Great defense, inefficient on offense despite not having a high volue, only 6 years peak.
05-20-2008 , 02:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assani Fisher Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
Can anyone tell me more about Mullin's defense?
I'm curious to this as well to be honest. When I happily made the pick I was expecting it to be considered below average-average, maybe even bad. So anything above that is just an added bonus for me. Its hard to tell on BBall Reference because his defensive stats jump around a lot.

2 steals a game though fwiw.
05-20-2008 , 02:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighStakesPro Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
You do realize that Starbury was more hihgly rated from a pure talent perspective at 23 than Chris Paul, right?
what does "pure talent" mean?
05-20-2008 , 02:15 AM
Flying Moose,

While I think we all find it intuitively right that people with poor teams shoot worse than they would if they had good teammates, I'm really not sure it's the case. Looking at some of the big men who've been drafted that went from good to bad or bad to good teams.

Elton Brand shoots .024 higher the year the Clips make the playoffs than he had the year before, but the year after when they miss he shoots .006 better.

Garnett shoots .003 worse the year the Wolves go the western conference finals the year before and .003 lower than the year after (I know .003 means nothing, just showing what the stats say)

Gasol shoots .510 when the Grizz are awful and .503 when they're a 49 win team

Larry Nance shoots .581 when the suns win 32 games (damn the more I look at this guy the more it's clear how Clark had the steal of the draft so far) and shoots .539 when the Cavs win 57 games.

I don't really feel like going much further and I only looked at the numbers briefly to try and find situations where there were teams a few seasons apart with big win differences. I'm not saying this is definitive, and that nobody big man would get better with different teammates around him, but I think overall the effect is pretty small.


Also, while Jack touched on this briefly while talking about JO and Reggie Miller, it's really unfair to compare a big man who shoots exclusively 2's to the a whole team which has a lot of three point shots taken as for example about a 5th of the 03-04 Pacers' shots were 3's and they made them at .350 clip.
05-20-2008 , 02:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lapoker17 Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
wow mullin finally. i kept waiting and then when peja went before him i almost gave up.
Agreed completely. Mullin made the Peja pick look very bad.
05-20-2008 , 02:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assani Fisher Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
Can anyone tell me more about Mullin's defense?
from what I can remember he was not a good defensive player...but wasnt all that terrible either. He didnt take any chances and just played solid positionial defense for the most part...the problem was that he was regularly defending much more athletic guys at the 2 or 3 spot.
05-20-2008 , 02:17 AM
Seriously, you guys post a **** load in this thread, so much that it really baffles me. This thread needs to be turned into a book.
05-20-2008 , 02:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by horizon Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
Assani,

Wanted to trade Lebron for Duncan and swap pick for round two and three if Moncrief was still available( I really thought he was going to fall). WOuld you have taken it? I see that you was eying the same combo.
If Moncrief was available I can assure you that I would not have even looked at a PM offering a trade. Moncrief is the steal of the draft BY FAR imo at where he was taken. If he lasted to my pick, it was a sure thing I would've taken him.

Honestly thinking about what I would've taken to trade down if he was there....I don't even know if giving me your 3rd rounder(for my 10th) would've done it.
05-20-2008 , 02:20 AM
question about Sid...isnt he ineligable?...he was drafted in 79 and played in the 1979-1980 season.

I thought it was 1980 and above?
05-20-2008 , 02:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assani Fisher Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
If Moncrief was available I can assure you that I would not have even looked at a PM offering a trade. Moncrief is the steal of the draft BY FAR imo at where he was taken. If he lasted to my pick, it was a sure thing I would've taken him.

Honestly thinking about what I would've taken to trade down if he was there....I don't even know if giving me your 3rd rounder(for my 10th) would've done it.
Did you even see Moncrief play? And if so, how much? Just wondering.
05-20-2008 , 02:21 AM
79 is good, 78 is bad
05-20-2008 , 02:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighStakesPro Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
Pretty ironic coming from you, always nagging people to make cogent arguments and everything. Maybe you could try practicing what you preach.
Apparently you missed the part where I said I had to run but was going to make two quick comments. As you can tell, I'm discussing it much more in depth now that I have the time.
05-20-2008 , 02:21 AM
I always though Mullin's defense was underrated, so average to above average. Analysts got on him for playing bad D, but I thought they were a bit harsh. If he had a weakness, it was against lights out three point shooters who could drive. Mullin never really got up on guys because he didn't have a lot of quickness.
05-20-2008 , 02:21 AM
so was Magic. That's the cutoff
05-20-2008 , 02:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nath Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
man, i want to make jokes about it but i don't want to name players

actually, i just thought of someone you might actually take in round 3, and if you do i'm gonna be giggling all the way
I have someone in mind too. Someone who I don't think should even be drafted, but I'm certain he will be and maybe even relatively early.
05-20-2008 , 02:22 AM
seriously Assani can you fix your coach/player bomb post the hypocrisy is tilting me hard
05-20-2008 , 02:23 AM
I dunno that Moncrief is the steal of the draft and if he is I doubt that will last, 3rd round should have some sick value the way things are going. Maybe I just overrate some players.
05-20-2008 , 02:25 AM
FWIW my pick is ready to go.. I just spent 30 minutes on the write-up, and I will go nuclear if alex picks him.
05-20-2008 , 02:28 AM
FWIW guys, I know Jermaine wasn't the most efficient 20/10 big man left, but all the bigs I had in mind along with him were revolving doors on defense and had never played on winning teams. I wanted his shot blocking and defensive rebounding, both of which he excels at.
05-20-2008 , 02:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assani Fisher Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
Sure thing.....

-Marbury is 5th among active players in loss shares.

-Marbury just doesn't seem to win:

He was drafted by the Timberwolves. They won 40 and 45 games with him. They traded him midseason the next year. The first full year without him they won 50 games.
Yeah because 50 wins is monumentally greater than 45wins , and obviously the five more wins were undeniably due to Marbury leaving. Obviously if Marbury had stayed they only would have won exactly 45 wins again amirite?

Quote:
The Nets won 26 games with Marbury in 00-01(Marbury was traded right near the end of the season). The next year with Kidd instead of Marbury they won 52 games.
Okay, so you have provided evidence that Kidd is a better point guard than Marbury. Great. Nice strawman.

Quote:
The 03-04 Suns won 29 games. They traded Marbury midseason. Next season with Nash they won 62 games.
Wow could you really be this blatantly biased? The Suns got killed by injuries that year and started 3-15, they basically tanked the season halfway through. Before that they were 44-38 and made the playoffs.

Quote:
Obviously he hasn't been a winner with the Knicks.
Yeah and the Knicks record ha absolutely nothing to do with Isiah Thomas and Larry Brown and Isiah Thomas being the biggest jokes of a coach and GM respectively in the "modern era", it's all on Stephon I'm sure. Just put Kidd on the Knicks and they would get 50 wins right?

Quote:
-"In all seriousness though, we aren't doing an 82-game regular season, it's basically just one big playoffs, so Marbury will definitely not be half-assing on the court when everything is at stake. "

I found this statement interesting consider that in 4 playoff appearances Marbury put up a 36.5 FG% and a 121-64 assist-to-turnover ratio.
Great, he was playing on lower seeded and clearly overmatched teams each time, and two of those years were at age 19 and 20, plus we're talking about a ****ing 18-game sample size, you're really going to hold it against him that he didn't have an epic playoff career based on all of this?

Quote:
-Marbury is bat**** insane.
Maybe now he is, but like I said in the write-up, at age 24 he was definitely salvageable. Age 24 was right before he got traded to Phoenix.

Quote:
-Marbury is not a good defender, nor is he extremely efficient, nor is he a huge bulk scorer. He does nothing at an elite level. This is still round 2. You should be getting someone who does SOMETHING elite. Marbury will score 20 points per game with below average efficiency. He'll dish out 7 or 8 assists per game. He'll be weak defensively.
My argument is that Marbury's low efficiency is a result of him being screwed over by being on dysfunctional teams, assclown coaches, and that if I get him at age 24 and surround him with a strong team as I plan to do, and a taskmaster coach, I'm going to get a significantly improved version of what you currently see with the Knicks.

Quote:
-Marbury is going to take shots, and you only have one ball. In a draft like this you're going to have a lot of efficient teams. Marbury kills you here, and like I said above he adds nothing. I could understand an inefficient player like Ben Wallace who gives you something(defense) and doesn't take a lot of shots, but Marbury doesn't give you anything really.
Like many other people said earlier, an offensive zero is a major liability, because you basically have five guys guarding four. With Marbury I have a multi-dimensional thread that many other point guards don't provide: he's a threat to shoot, penetrate, cross-over, break fools' ankles, and what have you. Defenses will have to respects him as a threat to dribble, pass, or score, and that will make it easier for the other players on my team to get open for easy shots. I'm not accepting as inevitable that he is going to take 20 shots a game regardless of what kind of team I have. A lot of players in history changed their game to suit their team's needs. Look at Dennis Rodman, he was a high scorer in college, but in the NBA he shot less and became a rebounding beast and pretty clearly a better overall player. Your rules were that we get an exact copy of the player at age 24. As far as I know there's nothing in Marbury's DNA that says "20-shots-per-game".

Quote:
-Defense, defense, defense, defense, defense. Its what wins basketball games. Marbury is not good at it.
OKAY, I GET IT, YOU ARE IN LOVE WITH DEFENSE, you trumpet all the defense cliches, fine. Playing "follow the leader" isn't my idea of building the best team.

Quote:
-Marbury is struggling to get playing time on the New York ****ing Knicks right now. Think about that.
IT'S THE KNICKS. ISIAH THOMAS WAS THE COACH. NEED I SAY MORE?

Last edited by HighStakesPro; 05-20-2008 at 02:32 AM. Reason: edited response to your point about him "adding nothing".
05-20-2008 , 02:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingmoose Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
What?? This is nonsense, most big men who block shots and rebound well don't shoot 3s. This is like saying you don't like Chris Mullin because he couldn't defend Shaq in the post.

And the fact that he had an aging reggie doesn't mean his team was efficient offensively. The bottom line is that he led his team in scoring with a consistently higher than team-average efficiency.
Yes, but most big men who block shots and rebound well shot better than 45%.

FG% doesn't tell the whole story. You have to account for 3-pointers and free throws. So when Reggie Miller shoots .441, he's way more efficient than Jermaine O'Neal who's shoooting .475 or whatever. This is because Miller score more points per shot by hitting 3s and getting to the line. O'Neal doesn't do much other than make x% of his shots. When you have a guy who makes his living off of 2 pointers alone, he has to be very efficient (in the 53% range).
05-20-2008 , 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assani Fisher Modern Era NBA Build a Franchise Draft Discussion - Let's Get'er Done
what does "pure talent" mean?
I'm guessing something along the lines of "raw talent" meaning "talent that needs to be coached" meaning that the player has to be coachable. Not sure how this is a plus for Marbury.

FWIW, googling "Stephon Marbury sucks" has been pretty entertaining.

      
m