If the 2005 NBA Draft Were Done Over, Who Goes #1?

Laker_Dynasty · Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:24 am Post subject:

Knowing what we know now, I'd say it's still a difficult call. The only thing I can say is that Marvin Williams would drop significantly and Drew would be in the top 4 without a doubt.

All GM's have different takes on who to draft and who not to draft. Also, if "need" should be more considered than "talent" or vice versa. At first, I had written a long explanation, but I think the easiest thing to do would be to conceptualize the top 5 players replacing the other lottery pick on each respective teams 2005-2006 roster. I'm including Granger in the discussion, with Drew replacing Marvin Williams.

When I look at the overall picture and the teams that controlled the top 5 picks, I honestly think that the Atlanta Hawks would have benefited the most from having a great point guard. It's already 6 years from when they got Joe Johnson, and even though they picked up Kirk Hinrich to run the point, for a long time they had searched for the right point guard. Even when they picked up Bibby, he didn't have the impact to the team that they needed.

If we go even further into looking at who would be #1, you'd also have to consider that (although they wouldn't be #1 picks), they'd still be MUCH higher than they were drafted. Those two (2) players are David Lee and Monte Ellis. Those are players that would've had immediate impact. I'd put them at drafted #6 or #7 (can go either way), but either of them being on Portland or Toronto would've made a good impact.
_________________
Just chill

and watch the new Dynasty evolve...

Time for the Lakers to create a whole new legacy! We want 10 more trophies boys!

Laker_Dynasty · Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 11:30 am Post subject:

70sdude · Star Player Joined: 05 Feb 2009 Posts: 4567

oldschool32 · Franchise Player Joined: 24 Jun 2005 Posts: 20032

Sister Golden Hair · Franchise Player Joined: 01 May 2001 Posts: 15872

Bogut is a good player and probably an ideal type center for PJ's version of the Tri.

But Andrew is more of a difference maker and, as someone noted, Bogut has had his own share of injuries, some just as freakish as Andrew's.

LA_Lakers_Rule · Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:41 pm Post subject:

GoldenThroat · Moderator Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 37474

GMs pick promising bigs ahead of promising smalls because of the rarity of their skill sets. How often do you hear, "they're a good wing player away from being a title contender."? Not very. But you hear it a lot as it relates to bigs.

So as a result, the failure rate is much higher, because GMs know how hard it is to get a good big, and that their only real vehicle to do so is through the draft. It's a lot easier to find good smalls to fill out a roster that's built around a dominant big than it is to do the opposite.

LA_Lakers_Rule · Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:04 pm Post subject:

^ Yep, which is WHY Drew would have gone very high in that draft knowing what we know now... Easily in the top 3 and most likely a #1 pick... which is the question posed by the OP in the first place.... "What would the GM's do".... and why I'm suggesting that a great majority of voters are missing the point...
_________________
Rule = win titles

Good judgment comes from experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. - Will Rogers ...

Zhengi · Star Player Joined: 06 Sep 2004 Posts: 6445

Well, at least there is some semblence of rational in the poll.
_________________
I'm like a Hadouken, down-right Fierce!