|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Vanquish
Star Player
Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1561
Location: London
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Edited my post to answer your point 3, above  Will just repaste.
-------
The draft successes you listed are mostly during the showtime era where rookies left after 3/4 years in college. As we saw from Kuzma and Josh Hart, that kind of preparation in college makes it easier for scouts to predict their performance in the nba. The current draft takes in 18/19 year olds at the very top, that makes a super crap shoot. There's more than a fair share of busts at the top of the draft in recent years, because its hard to envision how these young players will develop being so raw.
Also I stated that in my opinion the true driver for the championships was a trade for gasol. Bynum made the all star team once and promptly broke down thereafter.
Eddie Jones we traded. I think the classic lakers blueprint is to win championships through free agency not the draft, that's probably why my expectations are - from your point of view - low.
ETA: Just to add a quick reply to point 1. I hope for a superstar at no 2 but am not suprised if its a rotation player because that's what the statistics tell me. Its basically like any other lottery. I hope for a winning ticket but I know the chances of that happening are really low, so I'm not that suprised when I see my number not being called out.
Last edited by Vanquish on Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:24 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16118
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Vanquish wrote: | Edited my post to answer your point 3, above Will just repaste.
-------
The draft successes you listed are mostly during the showtime era where rookies left after 3/4 years in college. As we saw from Kuzma and Josh Hart, that kind of preparation in college makes it easier for scouts to predict their performance in the nba. The current draft takes in 18/19 year olds at the very top, that makes a super crap shoot. There's more than a fair share of busts at the top of the draft in recent years, because its hard to envision how these young players will develop being so raw.
Also I stated that in my opinion the true driver for the championships was a trade for gasol. Bynum made the all star team once and promptly broke down thereafter.
Eddie Jones we traded. I think the classic lakers blueprint is to win championships through free agency not the draft, that's probably why my expectations are - from your point of view - low. |
So can you come up with a recent championship team that didn't draft at least one superstar? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think just about every successful team built their team through FA, trades, and the draft. The only exception is maybe ... San Antonio.
But everyone else had a key player acquired either through drafting, trades, and or free agency.
It’s simple to me. If you draft a star, you acquire the other pieces since a star would make you too good to draft another one. If you draft complementary pieces, you acquire your stars via trades or free agency. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16118
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Vanquish wrote: | The draft successes you listed are mostly during the showtime era where rookies left after 3/4 years in college. As we saw from Kuzma and Josh Hart, that kind of preparation in college makes it easier for scouts to predict their performance in the nba. The current draft takes in 18/19 year olds at the very top, that makes a super crap shoot. There's more than a fair share of busts at the top of the draft in recent years, because its hard to envision how these young players will develop being so raw.
|
There's 2 points that I think you need to separate:
Point 1 - It was easier to have draft success back then than it is today (due to players staying in college longer) --> agreed
Point 2 - Does this mean that it's unnecessary to hit on draft picks? (i.e. get at least one superstar)?
Can you think of one team that didn't draft at least one superstar? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16118
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | I think just about every successful team built their team through FA, trades, and the draft. The only exception is maybe ... San Antonio.
But everyone else had a key player acquired either through drafting, trades, and or free agency.
It’s simple to me. If you draft a star, you acquire the other pieces since a star would make you too good to draft another one. If you draft complementary pieces, you acquire your stars via trades or free agency. |
But can you think of one championship team that didn't draft at least one superstar?
I can't think of one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | I think just about every successful team built their team through FA, trades, and the draft. The only exception is maybe ... San Antonio.
But everyone else had a key player acquired either through drafting, trades, and or free agency.
It’s simple to me. If you draft a star, you acquire the other pieces since a star would make you too good to draft another one. If you draft complementary pieces, you acquire your stars via trades or free agency. |
But can you think of one championship team that didn't draft at least one superstar?
I can't think of one. |
Detroit? Off the top of my head that would be it.
But to my point earlier, they built that team through free agency, trades, AND the draft which is what I think most teams do.
Last edited by ringfinger on Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:30 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vanquish
Star Player
Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1561
Location: London
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Vanquish wrote: | Edited my post to answer your point 3, above Will just repaste.
-------
The draft successes you listed are mostly during the showtime era where rookies left after 3/4 years in college. As we saw from Kuzma and Josh Hart, that kind of preparation in college makes it easier for scouts to predict their performance in the nba. The current draft takes in 18/19 year olds at the very top, that makes a super crap shoot. There's more than a fair share of busts at the top of the draft in recent years, because its hard to envision how these young players will develop being so raw.
Also I stated that in my opinion the true driver for the championships was a trade for gasol. Bynum made the all star team once and promptly broke down thereafter.
Eddie Jones we traded. I think the classic lakers blueprint is to win championships through free agency not the draft, that's probably why my expectations are - from your point of view - low. |
So can you come up with a recent championship team that didn't draft at least one superstar? |
I would say Detriot Pistons, 2003-2004. But then again, I consider the 2000s recent LOL Still remember those finals arggh.
The only player of note from that team which was drafted by detriot was Tayshuan Prince, but I don't think he's a superstar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RG73
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2001
Posts: 11508
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: |
If you look at our draft history and our reason for success as a franchise - pretty much, we nail our lottery picks.
Magic - no. 1
Worthy - no. 1
Byron - no. 5
Eddie Jones - no. 10
Kobe - no. 13
Bynum - no. 10
Only lottery pick since Magic that we didn't hit out of the ballpark that I can think of is George Lynch - no. 12. |
Byron was picked by the Clippers.
You're also comparing 4 different GMs here picking under vastly different circumstances. Each draft is unique. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vanquish
Star Player
Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1561
Location: London
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anyways, just to clarify, I'm not saying we should screw drafting and just get FAs in pursuit of a championship.
I think I'm more like, if we can get a superstar through the draft cool. If not, there's always other avenues to build a championship team. That's all |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16118
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Vanquish wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Vanquish wrote: | Edited my post to answer your point 3, above Will just repaste.
-------
The draft successes you listed are mostly during the showtime era where rookies left after 3/4 years in college. As we saw from Kuzma and Josh Hart, that kind of preparation in college makes it easier for scouts to predict their performance in the nba. The current draft takes in 18/19 year olds at the very top, that makes a super crap shoot. There's more than a fair share of busts at the top of the draft in recent years, because its hard to envision how these young players will develop being so raw.
Also I stated that in my opinion the true driver for the championships was a trade for gasol. Bynum made the all star team once and promptly broke down thereafter.
Eddie Jones we traded. I think the classic lakers blueprint is to win championships through free agency not the draft, that's probably why my expectations are - from your point of view - low. |
So can you come up with a recent championship team that didn't draft at least one superstar? |
I would say Detriot Pistons, 2003-2004. But then again, I consider the 2000s recent LOL Still remember those finals arggh.
The only player of note from that team which was drafted by detriot was Tayshuan Prince, but I don't think he's a superstar. |
Yeah, and Detroit was also the last team to win w/o a superstar. So they had no superstars.
So that's the blueprint that you want to follow? A blueprint that you can only come up with 1 year of success?
How about this question -
When's the last title contending team that didn't have a superstar that they drafted?
I can think of one off the top of my head: 2017 Houston Rockets.
Can you think of others? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PauPau
Starting Rotation
Joined: 12 Jul 2018
Posts: 844
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | I think just about every successful team built their team through FA, trades, and the draft. The only exception is maybe ... San Antonio.
But everyone else had a key player acquired either through drafting, trades, and or free agency.
It’s simple to me. If you draft a star, you acquire the other pieces since a star would make you too good to draft another one. If you draft complementary pieces, you acquire your stars via trades or free agency. |
But can you think of one championship team that didn't draft at least one superstar?
I can't think of one. |
Detroit? Off the top of my head that would be it.
But to my point earlier, they built that team through free agency, trades, AND the draft which is what I think most teams do. |
Translation - Bird Rights rock. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Vanquish wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Vanquish wrote: | Edited my post to answer your point 3, above Will just repaste.
-------
The draft successes you listed are mostly during the showtime era where rookies left after 3/4 years in college. As we saw from Kuzma and Josh Hart, that kind of preparation in college makes it easier for scouts to predict their performance in the nba. The current draft takes in 18/19 year olds at the very top, that makes a super crap shoot. There's more than a fair share of busts at the top of the draft in recent years, because its hard to envision how these young players will develop being so raw.
Also I stated that in my opinion the true driver for the championships was a trade for gasol. Bynum made the all star team once and promptly broke down thereafter.
Eddie Jones we traded. I think the classic lakers blueprint is to win championships through free agency not the draft, that's probably why my expectations are - from your point of view - low. |
So can you come up with a recent championship team that didn't draft at least one superstar? |
I would say Detriot Pistons, 2003-2004. But then again, I consider the 2000s recent LOL Still remember those finals arggh.
The only player of note from that team which was drafted by detriot was Tayshuan Prince, but I don't think he's a superstar. |
Yeah, and Detroit was also the last team to win w/o a superstar. So they had no superstars.
So that's the blueprint that you want to follow? A blueprint that you can only come up with 1 year of success?
How about this question -
When's the last title contending team that didn't have a superstar that they drafted?
I can think of one off the top of my head: 2017 Houston Rockets.
Can you think of others? |
Cleveland (second go around)
You guys are trying to create a single path to success. There isn’t one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vanquish
Star Player
Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1561
Location: London
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: |
Cleveland (second go around)
You guys are trying to create a single path to success. There isn’t one. |
I agree with this. Apologies, if my responses conveyed otherwise. My intention was just to argue that the draft isn't the be all end all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16118
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Vanquish wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Vanquish wrote: | Edited my post to answer your point 3, above Will just repaste.
-------
The draft successes you listed are mostly during the showtime era where rookies left after 3/4 years in college. As we saw from Kuzma and Josh Hart, that kind of preparation in college makes it easier for scouts to predict their performance in the nba. The current draft takes in 18/19 year olds at the very top, that makes a super crap shoot. There's more than a fair share of busts at the top of the draft in recent years, because its hard to envision how these young players will develop being so raw.
Also I stated that in my opinion the true driver for the championships was a trade for gasol. Bynum made the all star team once and promptly broke down thereafter.
Eddie Jones we traded. I think the classic lakers blueprint is to win championships through free agency not the draft, that's probably why my expectations are - from your point of view - low. |
So can you come up with a recent championship team that didn't draft at least one superstar? |
I would say Detriot Pistons, 2003-2004. But then again, I consider the 2000s recent LOL Still remember those finals arggh.
The only player of note from that team which was drafted by detriot was Tayshuan Prince, but I don't think he's a superstar. |
Yeah, and Detroit was also the last team to win w/o a superstar. So they had no superstars.
So that's the blueprint that you want to follow? A blueprint that you can only come up with 1 year of success?
How about this question -
When's the last title contending team that didn't have a superstar that they drafted?
I can think of one off the top of my head: 2017 Houston Rockets.
Can you think of others? |
Cleveland (second go around)
You guys are trying to create a single path to success. There isn’t one. |
Wasn't Kyrie drafted no. 1? Any other teams you can think of? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16118
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Vanquish wrote: | Anyways, just to clarify, I'm not saying we should screw drafting and just get FAs in pursuit of a championship.
I think I'm more like, if we can get a superstar through the draft cool. If not, there's always other avenues to build a championship team. That's all |
Yeah, that kind of goes w/o saying. That's life. You hope for something, it doesn't work out, you move on.
But, that's not how you come across though. You said, you hope for a superstar, but if you get a rotational player - then you're cool with that. I said that comes off as rationalization (or at least setting your expectations really low so you won't be disappointed).
And, you also come across as believing that the best way to build a championship team is through Free Agency.
| Quote: | | Lakers win championships, but the lakers have rarely done it with people we have drafted. We always done it through free agents because drafts are frankly a crap shoot. |
I don't think history reflects that though. It's tough to strike out 4 times in the lottery like we have so far (Randle, Ingram, DLo, Lonzo) and be able to build a championship team. (And by strikeout, I mean getting another superstar player).
It's hard as heck - now we must hit on our free agency signing or acquire another superstar via trade. If you think drafting is a crapshoot, then banking on getting 2 superstars via free agency and trades is a crapshoot as well. We've gotten one, let's see if we can get another. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laker50
Star Player
Joined: 07 Mar 2014
Posts: 2140
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Somebody posted that the Lakers have two more bullets before they get high draft position and over the cap.
Think it is one bullet, the FA next year.
All the wasted bullets in 2 picks though Ingram might work out to be decent.
If the Lakers had gotten James before drafting Lonzo they would not draft him for his skill is redundant and adding Rondo makes it even so.
Lebron needs shooters to win championships. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Wasn't Kyrie drafted no. 1? Any other teams you can think of? |
Yeah, good point.
Lakers 2000-2002? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16118
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| laker50 wrote: | Somebody posted that the Lakers have two more bullets before they get high draft position and over the cap.
Think it is one bullet, the FA next year.
All the wasted bullets in 2 picks though Ingram might work out to be decent.
If the Lakers had gotten James before drafting Lonzo they would not draft him for his skill is redundant and adding Rondo makes it even so.
Lebron needs shooters to win championships. |
I said that. And the other bullet would be a trade for a superstar, like Anthony Davis.
That's still in play. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16118
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Wasn't Kyrie drafted no. 1? Any other teams you can think of? |
Yeah, good point.
Lakers 2000-2002? |
Kobe drafted no. 13? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Wasn't Kyrie drafted no. 1? Any other teams you can think of? |
Yeah, good point.
Lakers 2000-2002? |
Kobe drafted no. 13? |
Nope. He was drafted by the Hornets. Hornets then traded him to the Lakers for Vlade. So he was an acquisition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vanquish
Star Player
Joined: 15 Jun 2005
Posts: 1561
Location: London
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Wasn't Kyrie drafted no. 1? Any other teams you can think of? |
Yeah, good point.
Lakers 2000-2002? |
Kobe drafted no. 13? |
Nope. He was drafted by the Hornets. Hornets then traded him to the Lakers for Vlade. So he was an acquisition. |
I would give that point to LongBeach. The Hornets drafted Kobe on our instructions and then immediately traded him to us in return for Vlade.
What makes the move so masterful, is that a lot of people thought the primary motivation for the trade was to get rid of Divac to obtain the cap room for shaq. Everyone passed on kobe because high schoolers were considered too risky at the time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16118
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Wasn't Kyrie drafted no. 1? Any other teams you can think of? |
Yeah, good point.
Lakers 2000-2002? |
Kobe drafted no. 13? |
Nope. He was drafted by the Hornets. Hornets then traded him to the Lakers for Vlade. So he was an acquisition. |
That's pretty technical. Jerry West wanted Kobe. Hornets were making the draft for the Lakers.
But the topic is about the draft being a crapshoot.
Kobe hadn't played in the league yet. Was a drafted player. I don't see the difference between trading Vlade for the no. 13 pick then drafting Kobe, vs. Charlotte drafting Kobe then trading him to the Lakers.
Would it be less of a crapshoot that way? Seems like the same.
I mean, would it be less of a crapshoot if we let someone else draft Lonzo then trade for him on draft day?
| Quote: | With the 13th pick in the 1996 NBA Draft, the Charlotte Hornets selected Kobe Bryant out of Lower Merion High School in Philadelphia. Then, in a draft day trade that would change the course of NBA history, they dealt him to the Los Angeles Lakers in exchange for Vlade Divac. This much is indisputable.
How it all happened, however, is not.
Over the years this deal has been well-chronicled, and all signs point to a master manipulation on the part of Kobe, his agent Arn Tellem and then-Lakers general manager Jerry West, who, it's been widely said, was so smitten with Bryant that he effectively worked in cahoots with Tellem to limit Bryant's pre-draft exposure to other teams. Bryant, for his part, has maintained that he didn't have anything to do with leveraging his way to L.A. He says, in fact, that the Hornets never wanted him in the first place.
From ESPN's Baxter Holmes:
"Charlotte never wanted me," Bryant said. "[Hornets coach Dave] Cowens told me he didn't want me. It wasn't a question of me even playing here. They had a couple of guards already, a couple small forwards already. So it wasn't like I would be off the bench much. "
"I mean, I had grown up watching basketball," Bryant said. "I knew who Dave Cowens was and [was] pretty excited [to play for him]. Then I was like, 'Oh, all right.' I quickly transitioned from smiley kid to killer instinct."
"Cowens told me, 'We don't really need you here,'" Bryant said.
Kobe Bryant
✔
@kobebryant
On this day 18yrs ago the hornets told me right after they drafted me that they had no use for me and were going to trade me #thanku #lakers
For starters, 12 teams had to pass on him. That's where West and Tellem came in. Together, they began orchestrating a series of skipped workouts and floating rumors in an all-out effort to deter any and all suitors. There was also something else working in their favor. Back then, Kevin Garnett had only rebroken the seal of high school players going straight to the NBA one year earlier, and there was still plenty of skepticism about an 18-year-old making that jump. Bryant was a risk. Guys like eventual top pick Allen Iverson, Marcus Camby and Ray Allen were seen as much safer, if not altogether better picks than Kobe.
Everyone thought it was done. Almost miraculously, all the pieces had fallen into place. The Hornets were fully prepared to move Bryant to L.A. in exchange for Divac. The only problem? Divac, apparently, wasn't willing to be moved, and in fact threatened to retire if the deal went through.
From June 26 to July 11, the Lakers, Hornets and Divac were at a stalemate. Vlade didn't want to leave L.A. He'd worked hard to become entrenched in that organization and the fans had fallen in love with him. He didn't want to go to the other side of the country to play for a decent Charlotte team. This, obviously, was going to blow up West's plan. The trade for Kobe couldn't be completed without Hornets GM Bob Bass getting a guarantee Divac would play.
From the Charlotte Observer:
The morning of that draft we got a tip at the Observer that the Hornets were discussing a trade to acquire a center. Eventually, working with Scott Howard-Cooper, then of the Los Angeles Times, we figured out this was the deal: If Bryant lasted to the Hornets’ 13th pick, they would select him and deal him to the Lakers for Divac’s pre-existing contract. That gave West both Bryant and the cap space to pursue O’Neal.
This got a little complicated when Divac threatened to retire, rather than report to the Hornets. I asked Bass what he’d do if Divac didn’t relent and Bass said he’d keep Bryant.
That put Tellem in a nasty mood. Eighteen years later I remember him screaming at me over the phone from Southern California that Bryant would be a Laker no matter what.
Divac gave in and the deal was completed in July. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Wasn't Kyrie drafted no. 1? Any other teams you can think of? |
Yeah, good point.
Lakers 2000-2002? |
Kobe drafted no. 13? |
Nope. He was drafted by the Hornets. Hornets then traded him to the Lakers for Vlade. So he was an acquisition. |
That's pretty technical. Jerry West wanted Kobe. Hornets were making the draft for the Lakers.
But the topic is about the draft being a crapshoot.
Kobe hadn't played in the league yet. Was a drafted player. I don't see the difference between trading Vlade for the no. 13 pick then drafting Kobe, vs. Charlotte drafting Kobe then trading him to the Lakers.
Would it be less of a crapshoot that way? Seems like the same.
I mean, would it be less of a crapshoot if we let someone else draft Lonzo then trade for him on draft day? |
Well, exactly, that's why I consider it a trade and not a drafted scenario because West was specifically targeting a player and not a pick. It's different when you trade for a pick, not knowing who will be available, and pick what you want with what is left over. It's different when you go and specifically target a player and acquire him or have the other team acquire him on your behalf which by all accounts did not occur in this case.
The difference is that the Lakers weren't after the 13th pick. They were specifically after Kobe Bryant regardless of what team took him and where. If he were drafted 14th instead, I think they still would have made moves to get him.
Sure, it's still a crapshoot though, I agree.
In either case, I'm not sure what we are debating on. I think all components of acquiring talent are necessary to build a championship and I'm pretty sure all championship teams have a drafted player that was key to their success, and, acquisitions as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jesusdelonla
Franchise Player
Joined: 24 Jan 2018
Posts: 15430
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
In Holiday spirit, lonzo has offered to build brick City in Charlotte.
Lol jk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16118
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Wasn't Kyrie drafted no. 1? Any other teams you can think of? |
Yeah, good point.
Lakers 2000-2002? |
Kobe drafted no. 13? |
Nope. He was drafted by the Hornets. Hornets then traded him to the Lakers for Vlade. So he was an acquisition. |
That's pretty technical. Jerry West wanted Kobe. Hornets were making the draft for the Lakers.
But the topic is about the draft being a crapshoot.
Kobe hadn't played in the league yet. Was a drafted player. I don't see the difference between trading Vlade for the no. 13 pick then drafting Kobe, vs. Charlotte drafting Kobe then trading him to the Lakers.
Would it be less of a crapshoot that way? Seems like the same.
I mean, would it be less of a crapshoot if we let someone else draft Lonzo then trade for him on draft day? |
Well, exactly, that's why I consider it a trade and not a drafted scenario because West was specifically targeting a player and not a pick. It's different when you trade for a pick, not knowing who will be available, and pick what you want with what is left over. It's different when you go and specifically target a player and acquire him or have the other team acquire him on your behalf which by all accounts did not occur in this case.
The difference is that the Lakers weren't after the 13th pick. They were specifically after Kobe Bryant regardless of what team took him and where. If he were drafted 14th instead, I think they still would have made moves to get him.
Sure, it's still a crapshoot though, I agree.
In either case, I'm not sure what we are debating on. I think all components of acquiring talent are necessary to build a championship and I'm pretty sure all championship teams have a drafted player that was key to their success, and, acquisitions as well. |
No, I don't know what you are debating.
This topic started with Vanquish saying that drafts are a crapshoot and we should focus on other avenues.
So it would actually be up to him to define what a "draft" is. I mean, his whole point about the draft being a crapshoot nowadays was because 18/19 year olds aren't known commodities. You don't know what you're going to get. So whether we drafted Kobe or acquired him after he was drafted, seems like he's still this unknown commodity that Vanguish says is a "crapshoot"
Now, I can't see how Charlotte drafting Kobe and trading him to us would make it any less of a crapshoot because now it's defined as a trade (but you never know).
But seems like you're saying it's more of a crapshoot if we traded Vlade for the no. 13 pick and drafted him and less of a crapshoot if we let Charlotte draft him first then trade for him.
Seems the same to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
