Imho, there is a huge drop off after Parker and Embiid. We need a top two pick.

[LarBrd33]

TP to saltlover for his analysis. 

I want to make it clear... I haven't watched a single College basketball game this year.  I absolutely do NOT follow the NCAA.  I just assume the experts aren't taking crazy pills.  Generally in my experience following the league the players they say are "can't miss" don't miss. 

When someone comes out and calls this draft "overrated", I immediately have to question whether or not that person actually follows college ball or if they are just watching a handful of games for the first time with NBA-tinted glasses.

saltlover gave his College b-ball credentials and then proceeded to back up what the experts have been saying.  This draft is epic.  I've yet to see anyone with any credibility say otherwise.  Typically it's just someone who watched Wiggins and was "underwhelmed", because he didn't drop 40 points "on the college level".  Those type of people don't know what they are talking about.  I don't know what I'm talking about either, but at least I have the sand to admit it.

[wahz]

I think I have seen enough to be confident that there are two guys who will make a huge difference wherever they go and beyond them there are no sure stars. The difference between 2nd and 3rd is going to be large. And Embiid doesn't look like an old man, nor does he look fragile. He is quick. He seems to be working very hard. Not much needs to be said about Parker. He is the most complete player already.

If we assume that the difference between the third and second draft position will be very large, what can we realistically do to move up without losing too much?

I'm going to ask you the same question I ask every sudden "expert".

Do you watch College basketball religiously every year?  Do you typically have a good eye for who will end up being stars in the NBA?  Or did you just watch a few games this year and make up your mind?

I watch a ton of college ball every year.
I thought Wade would be a superstar.
I wanted us to draft Aldridge.
I knew Durant should have gone first
I knew we stole McHale
I knew Rondo should start right away.
 

I have one glaring error I'll never live down and it was that I thought Bill Walton was overrated. I still wonder what the heck I was thinking about on that one.

But the point was to start a discussion about how to move up into the top two, and I understand your point: Am I right that in 2020 it will look like Parker and Embiid should go one and two? I hope I'm wrong, actually, since I doubt we pick in the top two.

[Atzar]

I don't think Jabari Parker is nearly as complete a player as he's being touted. 

At this point, he's a pretty terrible defensive player.  He has nice length and will occasionally use it to gamble for a steal, but that's his only positive impact on that end of the court.  Otherwise he displays inconsistent effort, poor positioning and fundamentals, and poor lateral quickness.  Two of those can be fixed with work, but he'll always get beaten by a player who can expose his lack of explosion. 

Do I think he'll be a star in the NBA?  Yes.  But who do use as a comp for Parker so often?  Carmelo - that comp fits on both ends of the floor.  How many times has Melo truly threatened for an NBA title? Arguably once, in a West that was weak except for the Lakers at the top.

So while this draft is continuously lauded for being the 'best since LeBron' and all of that stuff, you can't just toss Parker on a pile of spare parts and crap and expect him to eventually drag it to the finals like LeBron did in Cleveland.  He's not on that level.  He needs other stars behind him, as well as roleplayers who can mask his weaknesses (like Dirk had in his title year).

While I agree with what you're saying, the idea that the west was weak in 2009 is a little silly.

It was nothing like it is this year. 

San Antonio had no Ginobili, New Orleans quit on their coach, Dallas didn't play defense, Houston overachieved with Yao and scraps, etc. 

Not a strong playoff field for the west that year.

[nickagneta]

TP to saltlover for his analysis. 

I want to make it clear... I haven't watched a single College basketball game this year.  I absolutely do NOT follow the NCAA.  I just assume the experts aren't taking crazy pills.  Generally in my experience following the league the players they say are "can't miss" don't miss. 

When someone comes out and calls this draft "overrated", I immediately have to question whether or not that person actually follows college ball or if they are just watching a handful of games for the first time with NBA-tinted glasses.

saltlover gave his College b-ball credentials and then proceeded to back up what the experts have been saying.  This draft is epic.  I've yet to see anyone with any credibility say otherwise.  Typically it's just someone who watched Wiggins and was "underwhelmed", because he didn't drop 40 points "on the college level".  Those type of people don't know what they are talking about.  I don't know what I'm talking about either, but at least I have the sand to admit it.

Well I call this draft over rated and I have probably watched more college ball than you have pro ball so if you are talking about me you could not be more wrong.

Edit: That sounded harsher than I wanted it to be but basically it points to the fact that people on this board don't know other people on this board and trying to make it seem that another poster's opinion isn't valid just because YOU(meaning anyone) don't think they are qualified as Chad Ford, doesn't mean they don't have the right to have that opinion or that they are wrong or that they aren't as qualified as Chad Ford.

[Smokeeye123]

Lol some people think there are like 10 superstar players and then there are people in this thread who thinks there is like 1 or two and that the draft is overrated.

#letsfindahappymedium

[manl_lui]

I will define myself as a college basketball expert, relative at least to a Celtics message board -- I didn't really start watching NBA ball with regularity until 2005, but watched as much NCAA as I could get my hands on for a decade before, and still only watch the C's when I watch the NBA.

Parker is as impressive as any freshman small forward I remember seeing at a major college program since Carmelo Anthony.  He might be better, might be worse, because a decade can do a lot to your memory, but he should be in the same discussion as Melo.  Here is a side-by-side comparison of their stats, for those who like statistics.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=carmelo-anthony&i=1&p1=jabari-parker

(Note: I'd put Kevin Durant above Melo, but I also think they weren't playing the same position.  Durant was unquestionably a stretch 4, and sometimes a stretch 5 in college, whereas Melo and Parker are playing a much more similar position.  If you want to argue that I should compare Parker and Durant, I will tell you KD was better.)
I've said in other posts how much I like Embiid.  I do think college centers are harder to judge, especially elite ones, because they so rarely have anyone near their level to go up against.  Also, they sometimes rely very much on having a decent pg to get much going offensively, since 7-foot tall 19 year-olds (and heck, 22 year-olds), rarely have much in the way of offensive refinement (because they never need to develop it in college or high school to get their shot off).  That said, Embiid is definitely a defensive difference-maker, and a decent passer out of the post when double-teamed.  He's better than Roy Hibbert as a freshman, although certainly not Roy Hibbert as a senior.  Greg Oden, in my opinion, was better as a freshman, which a) makes me sad about what his career has amounted to, and b) remind you there is no sure thing.  Due to the scarcity of elite centers in the world, Embiid is my #1 hope for the C's to draft.  That said, he only plays about 50% of his team's minutes so far, and is someone who's I think would really benefit from a second year in school, because he is new to the game.  For personal monetary reasons, I think he should come out, but from a basketball perspective, Embiid after 1-2 more years of Bill Self could be on a hall-of-fame track.  Here's a comparison of Embiid, freshman Hibbert, and Oden.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=greg-oden&i=1&p1=joel-embiid&p2=roy-hibbert&roy-hibbert=2004-2005

I think Wiggins is getting to the point of being underrated at this point.  He hasn't looked as consistently good as Jabari Parker, but there's no question in my mind why everyone was fawning over him prior to the start of the year.  I think the expectations of him had been set at MVP-LeBron level, which was very unfair.  To me he and Parker are still the clear top 2 in the class, and if they go 1-2, there will be two happy teams at the top.

I think Randle has at times been dominant, but I think any talk of him being selected above Parker or Wiggins this point isn't based on evidence.  Randle punishes the mismatches he gets in the paint, which is frequent, but doesn't have 3-point range, and can get very careless with the ball.  He looks like a very good college freshman power forward, but much more like an Anthony Bennett or Derrick Favors (very very good), than like a Chris Webber whom you remember for decades.

I like Marcus Smart a lot more than other people here, I think.  He's probably the best player at a major college of taking over a game this year.  Last year that player to me was Trey Burke.  OSU has other talent, but he is the transcendent player that makes that team go.  I'd probably take Smart above Randle if I were starting a team.

I haven't seen enough of Gordon in Arizona, because I don't stay up as late as I used to watching West Coast basketball.  (Getting older stinks).  What I have seen however, has been very good.  Looking at his game log lets me know that I've missed his stinkers, and why people have gotten down on him.  His best games have definitely made him look like he's in the same class as Randle, and his worst games as someone who slides out of the draft.

My feeling is the top 5 draftable players in college are Parker in Wiggins in your top 2, and Smart, Embiid, and Randle as 3-5.  To me, this is a deep top 5.  I think many years, a player of Embiid's quality or Smart's quality goes #1, and someone like Randle is consistently in the top 3 in all but the deepest years.  With Exum also being in the mix, one of those guys will likely slide out of the top 5, which to me means at #6 you're getting someone who in most years would be no worse than #3.

To me this draft will have the best player since Kevin Durant, and also the best top 2 since that draft as well.  While I'd take the top 2 of 2007-2008 over the top 2 this year (again, this is without prior knowledge of the sad case of Greg Oden), I'd probably take anyone in this year's top 6 over Al Horford, who went #3 and has been a very good NBA player.  Jeff Green went #5 that year, and I see Glenn Robinson III as a very similar player, and it looks like he'll be in the 10-20 range.  To me there is no panic if we miss out on one of even the top 4 picks.  This draft is rightfully seen as historic at the top of the class.  The depth of it also potentially extends very far through the first round, depending who comes out earlier.

One final note for newer college basketball watchers -- I think the conference schedule, which is just starting, tends to be a better barometer for performance than the non-conference schedule, especially for freshman (at major colleges).  In the non-conference schedule, you see guys going up against lesser competition most nights.  Sure, there are the big games (and there has been better scheduling of those big games over the past decade), but most nights it's against some small-conference school who won't stand a chance of beating you.  There's less scouting of players, and more "weird" systems run, so that can have a pretty big impact, positively or negatively, for players.  Once you get to the conference schedule, there's more film on the players, and opposing team's are much more familiar with each other.  Dominating conference play is much more important than early-season or tournament play, in my opinion.

this is probably one of the best statistics I read about college ball to date.

I may be taking your comments wrong a bit, but I think you're also implying that if the Cs get a top 5 pick, then we should be safe, because the top 5 is very very deep.

Again, I really like Parker and Embiid, as my top 2, and Marcus Smart as my 3rd.

[D.o.s.]

I don't think Jabari Parker is nearly as complete a player as he's being touted. 

At this point, he's a pretty terrible defensive player.  He has nice length and will occasionally use it to gamble for a steal, but that's his only positive impact on that end of the court.  Otherwise he displays inconsistent effort, poor positioning and fundamentals, and poor lateral quickness.  Two of those can be fixed with work, but he'll always get beaten by a player who can expose his lack of explosion. 

Do I think he'll be a star in the NBA?  Yes.  But who do use as a comp for Parker so often?  Carmelo - that comp fits on both ends of the floor.  How many times has Melo truly threatened for an NBA title? Arguably once, in a West that was weak except for the Lakers at the top.

So while this draft is continuously lauded for being the 'best since LeBron' and all of that stuff, you can't just toss Parker on a pile of spare parts and crap and expect him to eventually drag it to the finals like LeBron did in Cleveland.  He's not on that level.  He needs other stars behind him, as well as roleplayers who can mask his weaknesses (like Dirk had in his title year).

While I agree with what you're saying, the idea that the west was weak in 2009 is a little silly.

It was nothing like it is this year. 

San Antonio had no Ginobili, New Orleans quit on their coach, Dallas didn't play defense, Houston overachieved with Yao and scraps, etc. 

Not a strong playoff field for the west that year.

That's a bit of a hindsight rewrite, I think. If the Lakers hadn't won, you could've said something like "Kobe went rogue and froze out Pau" instead.

Almost every team in the West that year was a 50 win team, with New Orleans and Utah missing that margin by one win and two, respectively.

So, yes, you could argue that it might've been weaker than years prior, but it was in no way a weak conference.

[Atzar]

I don't think Jabari Parker is nearly as complete a player as he's being touted. 

At this point, he's a pretty terrible defensive player.  He has nice length and will occasionally use it to gamble for a steal, but that's his only positive impact on that end of the court.  Otherwise he displays inconsistent effort, poor positioning and fundamentals, and poor lateral quickness.  Two of those can be fixed with work, but he'll always get beaten by a player who can expose his lack of explosion. 

Do I think he'll be a star in the NBA?  Yes.  But who do use as a comp for Parker so often?  Carmelo - that comp fits on both ends of the floor.  How many times has Melo truly threatened for an NBA title? Arguably once, in a West that was weak except for the Lakers at the top.

So while this draft is continuously lauded for being the 'best since LeBron' and all of that stuff, you can't just toss Parker on a pile of spare parts and crap and expect him to eventually drag it to the finals like LeBron did in Cleveland.  He's not on that level.  He needs other stars behind him, as well as roleplayers who can mask his weaknesses (like Dirk had in his title year).

While I agree with what you're saying, the idea that the west was weak in 2009 is a little silly.

It was nothing like it is this year. 

San Antonio had no Ginobili, New Orleans quit on their coach, Dallas didn't play defense, Houston overachieved with Yao and scraps, etc. 

Not a strong playoff field for the west that year.

That's a bit of a hindsight rewrite, I think. If the Lakers hadn't won, you could've said something like "Kobe went rogue and froze out Pau" instead.

Almost every team in the West that year was a 50 win team, with New Orleans and Utah missing that margin by one win and two, respectively.

So, yes, you could argue that it might've been weaker than years prior, but it was in no way a weak conference.

I feel that it's the weakest the West has been in several years and that the East actually fielded more legit contenders that year.  Don't look at the regular season win count; look at the postseason rosters.

Anyway, agree to disagree on that point.  Regardless, my initial point stands that Parker isn't quite what he's being billed as.

[D.o.s.]

Yeah, I'll give you that one for sure.

In his defense, though, I'm not sure there are very many players who can single-handedly drag their teams to making some serious noise in the playoffs.

[wahz]

I think I have seen enough to be confident that there are two guys who will make a huge difference wherever they go and beyond them there are no sure stars. The difference between 2nd and 3rd is going to be large. And Embiid doesn't look like an old man, nor does he look fragile. He is quick. He seems to be working very hard. Not much needs to be said about Parker. He is the most complete player already.

If we assume that the difference between the third and second draft position will be very large, what can we realistically do to move up without losing too much?

What pick do we have in this hypothetical scenario? A team in the top 2 would have to prefer one of the other players and we'd have to have a low enough pick where they could still definitely attain that player. Of course, this also requires that the other team in the top two will not take the player they covet. It's just way too early to speculate now with so many unknown factors.

Yes I can see the discussion has gone sideways since there won't be agreement on players. But what I am thinking is we go into this with all the picks we know about and a 6th and 14th this year. Yes its a wag! Can we trade future considerations, and this years 6th and 14th, and say Green to move up 4 spots. Imho, getting the 2nd pick is good enough. Randle can be Zach Randolph. Thats nice but Embiid can be better than that, imho

[Boris Badenov]

I think I have seen enough to be confident that there are two guys who will make a huge difference wherever they go and beyond them there are no sure stars. The difference between 2nd and 3rd is going to be large. And Embiid doesn't look like an old man, nor does he look fragile. He is quick. He seems to be working very hard. Not much needs to be said about Parker. He is the most complete player already.

If we assume that the difference between the third and second draft position will be very large, what can we realistically do to move up without losing too much?

What pick do we have in this hypothetical scenario? A team in the top 2 would have to prefer one of the other players and we'd have to have a low enough pick where they could still definitely attain that player. Of course, this also requires that the other team in the top two will not take the player they covet. It's just way too early to speculate now with so many unknown factors.

Very true. I don't see any team in the top of the draft trading their picks unless there is unmistakeable down right perfect info of who is getting drafted after them and they decide to do a conditional trade where they pick someone and trade picks with another team 2-3 picks away and thereby get their player while not "reaching" for him and simultaneously picking up some more value in the trade.

otherwise, I just don't see a team in the top 7-10 picks making a trade to trade down.

I agree for the most part. The only exception to your logic that comes to mind is Sacramento. They have Cousins who seems to have taken a leap, they've been burned in the draft recently (TRob) and they have a new owner who wants to build a winning team now.

I could see Sac trading their pick (maybe only if it's in the 4-5 range rather than the top 3) for an established star. For example, they might be interested in trading #4 for Rondo and #10.

Cleveland could possibly be in the same boat after the Bennett fiasco, I guess.

[LarBrd33]

TP to saltlover for his analysis. 

I want to make it clear... I haven't watched a single College basketball game this year.  I absolutely do NOT follow the NCAA.  I just assume the experts aren't taking crazy pills.  Generally in my experience following the league the players they say are "can't miss" don't miss. 

When someone comes out and calls this draft "overrated", I immediately have to question whether or not that person actually follows college ball or if they are just watching a handful of games for the first time with NBA-tinted glasses.

saltlover gave his College b-ball credentials and then proceeded to back up what the experts have been saying.  This draft is epic.  I've yet to see anyone with any credibility say otherwise.  Typically it's just someone who watched Wiggins and was "underwhelmed", because he didn't drop 40 points "on the college level".  Those type of people don't know what they are talking about.  I don't know what I'm talking about either, but at least I have the sand to admit it.

Well I call this draft over rated and I have probably watched more college ball than you have pro ball so if you are talking about me you could not be more wrong.

Edit: That sounded harsher than I wanted it to be but basically it points to the fact that people on this board don't know other people on this board and trying to make it seem that another poster's opinion isn't valid just because YOU(meaning anyone) don't think they are qualified as Chad Ford, doesn't mean they don't have the right to have that opinion or that they are wrong or that they aren't as qualified as Chad Ford.

Fair enough... and also Wahz just qualified his opinion by saying he's been watching College ball for years. 

I'll take your guys word for it.  If this is merely a 2 player draft, we oughta dump the picks and throw everything we have at bringing in vets like Melo, Afflalo and Asik.  The heck with the draft.  Go all-in.

But as of right now, I'll go with the consensus that we'd be in good position with a Top 8 pick.  Even if you're right and this draft is "overrated"... the league-wide consensus is that it is NOT overrated.  That means a Top 8 pick has considerable trade value whether you intend to use it or not.

[saltlover]

I will define myself as a college basketball expert, relative at least to a Celtics message board -- I didn't really start watching NBA ball with regularity until 2005, but watched as much NCAA as I could get my hands on for a decade before, and still only watch the C's when I watch the NBA.

Parker is as impressive as any freshman small forward I remember seeing at a major college program since Carmelo Anthony.  He might be better, might be worse, because a decade can do a lot to your memory, but he should be in the same discussion as Melo.  Here is a side-by-side comparison of their stats, for those who like statistics.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=carmelo-anthony&i=1&p1=jabari-parker

(Note: I'd put Kevin Durant above Melo, but I also think they weren't playing the same position.  Durant was unquestionably a stretch 4, and sometimes a stretch 5 in college, whereas Melo and Parker are playing a much more similar position.  If you want to argue that I should compare Parker and Durant, I will tell you KD was better.)
I've said in other posts how much I like Embiid.  I do think college centers are harder to judge, especially elite ones, because they so rarely have anyone near their level to go up against.  Also, they sometimes rely very much on having a decent pg to get much going offensively, since 7-foot tall 19 year-olds (and heck, 22 year-olds), rarely have much in the way of offensive refinement (because they never need to develop it in college or high school to get their shot off).  That said, Embiid is definitely a defensive difference-maker, and a decent passer out of the post when double-teamed.  He's better than Roy Hibbert as a freshman, although certainly not Roy Hibbert as a senior.  Greg Oden, in my opinion, was better as a freshman, which a) makes me sad about what his career has amounted to, and b) remind you there is no sure thing.  Due to the scarcity of elite centers in the world, Embiid is my #1 hope for the C's to draft.  That said, he only plays about 50% of his team's minutes so far, and is someone who's I think would really benefit from a second year in school, because he is new to the game.  For personal monetary reasons, I think he should come out, but from a basketball perspective, Embiid after 1-2 more years of Bill Self could be on a hall-of-fame track.  Here's a comparison of Embiid, freshman Hibbert, and Oden.
http://statsheet.com/mcb/players/compare?add=greg-oden&i=1&p1=joel-embiid&p2=roy-hibbert&roy-hibbert=2004-2005

I think Wiggins is getting to the point of being underrated at this point.  He hasn't looked as consistently good as Jabari Parker, but there's no question in my mind why everyone was fawning over him prior to the start of the year.  I think the expectations of him had been set at MVP-LeBron level, which was very unfair.  To me he and Parker are still the clear top 2 in the class, and if they go 1-2, there will be two happy teams at the top.

I think Randle has at times been dominant, but I think any talk of him being selected above Parker or Wiggins this point isn't based on evidence.  Randle punishes the mismatches he gets in the paint, which is frequent, but doesn't have 3-point range, and can get very careless with the ball.  He looks like a very good college freshman power forward, but much more like an Anthony Bennett or Derrick Favors (very very good), than like a Chris Webber whom you remember for decades.

I like Marcus Smart a lot more than other people here, I think.  He's probably the best player at a major college of taking over a game this year.  Last year that player to me was Trey Burke.  OSU has other talent, but he is the transcendent player that makes that team go.  I'd probably take Smart above Randle if I were starting a team.

I haven't seen enough of Gordon in Arizona, because I don't stay up as late as I used to watching West Coast basketball.  (Getting older stinks).  What I have seen however, has been very good.  Looking at his game log lets me know that I've missed his stinkers, and why people have gotten down on him.  His best games have definitely made him look like he's in the same class as Randle, and his worst games as someone who slides out of the draft.

My feeling is the top 5 draftable players in college are Parker in Wiggins in your top 2, and Smart, Embiid, and Randle as 3-5.  To me, this is a deep top 5.  I think many years, a player of Embiid's quality or Smart's quality goes #1, and someone like Randle is consistently in the top 3 in all but the deepest years.  With Exum also being in the mix, one of those guys will likely slide out of the top 5, which to me means at #6 you're getting someone who in most years would be no worse than #3.

To me this draft will have the best player since Kevin Durant, and also the best top 2 since that draft as well.  While I'd take the top 2 of 2007-2008 over the top 2 this year (again, this is without prior knowledge of the sad case of Greg Oden), I'd probably take anyone in this year's top 6 over Al Horford, who went #3 and has been a very good NBA player.  Jeff Green went #5 that year, and I see Glenn Robinson III as a very similar player, and it looks like he'll be in the 10-20 range.  To me there is no panic if we miss out on one of even the top 4 picks.  This draft is rightfully seen as historic at the top of the class.  The depth of it also potentially extends very far through the first round, depending who comes out earlier.

One final note for newer college basketball watchers -- I think the conference schedule, which is just starting, tends to be a better barometer for performance than the non-conference schedule, especially for freshman (at major colleges).  In the non-conference schedule, you see guys going up against lesser competition most nights.  Sure, there are the big games (and there has been better scheduling of those big games over the past decade), but most nights it's against some small-conference school who won't stand a chance of beating you.  There's less scouting of players, and more "weird" systems run, so that can have a pretty big impact, positively or negatively, for players.  Once you get to the conference schedule, there's more film on the players, and opposing team's are much more familiar with each other.  Dominating conference play is much more important than early-season or tournament play, in my opinion.

this is probably one of the best statistics I read about college ball to date.

I may be taking your comments wrong a bit, but I think you're also implying that if the Cs get a top 5 pick, then we should be safe, because the top 5 is very very deep.

Again, I really like Parker and Embiid, as my top 2, and Marcus Smart as my 3rd.

I'm not saying the C's will be safe if they pick in the top 5.  No pick is 100% lock, be it to injuries, lack of further developoment, etc.  And certainly I'd rather have pick #2 than pick #5, and I do think there is a drop off between the top 2 and the next 3-4.  I don't think the drop-off is as severe, and I don't think that Embiid is #2, even though he is my #1 choice for the Celtics due to need of an elite center.  I just think the chance of getting a multi-year all-star with #5 is greater this year than most years.  That's why enough teams are willing to tank, because even if the lottery balls don't bounce their way, if they draft high enough, it won't matter as much as in the 2012 draft for example, when it was Anthony Davis or bust (or do cartwheels that Jared Sullinger fell to you, as I would have done had I been able to cartwheels).

[nickagneta]

TP to saltlover for his analysis. 

I want to make it clear... I haven't watched a single College basketball game this year.  I absolutely do NOT follow the NCAA.  I just assume the experts aren't taking crazy pills.  Generally in my experience following the league the players they say are "can't miss" don't miss. 

When someone comes out and calls this draft "overrated", I immediately have to question whether or not that person actually follows college ball or if they are just watching a handful of games for the first time with NBA-tinted glasses.

saltlover gave his College b-ball credentials and then proceeded to back up what the experts have been saying.  This draft is epic.  I've yet to see anyone with any credibility say otherwise.  Typically it's just someone who watched Wiggins and was "underwhelmed", because he didn't drop 40 points "on the college level".  Those type of people don't know what they are talking about.  I don't know what I'm talking about either, but at least I have the sand to admit it.

Well I call this draft over rated and I have probably watched more college ball than you have pro ball so if you are talking about me you could not be more wrong.

Edit: That sounded harsher than I wanted it to be but basically it points to the fact that people on this board don't know other people on this board and trying to make it seem that another poster's opinion isn't valid just because YOU(meaning anyone) don't think they are qualified as Chad Ford, doesn't mean they don't have the right to have that opinion or that they are wrong or that they aren't as qualified as Chad Ford.

Fair enough... and also Wahz just qualified his opinion by saying he's been watching College ball for years. 

I'll take your guys word for it.  If this is merely a 2 player draft, we oughta dump the picks and throw everything we have at bringing in vets like Melo, Afflalo and Asik.  The heck with the draft.  Go all-in.

But as of right now, I'll go with the consensus that we'd be in good position with a Top 8 pick.  Even if you're right and this draft is "overrated"... the league-wide consensus is that it is NOT overrated.  That means a Top 8 pick has considerable trade value whether you intend to use it or not.

I for one don't think its a two player draft.

I happened to think there are a good 6-7 future All-Stars in this draft its good and its deep, depending on who comes out.

I think its over rated in the fact people are saying there are 6-7 franchise cornerstones in the draft. Now that's subjective in what does someone call a franchise cornerstone.

Well, Rondo isn't one and neither is ZBo and that's who Smart and Randle remind me of. Great players that bring a lot to the table but neither ZBo nor Rondo should be your #1 guy on a team if you want to be a contender.

Parker, Wiggins, Embiid look like the best bets for franchise cornerstones and even then Embiid has as many questions as Nerlens Noel, ability wise. Noel obviously has injury questions as well.

I've have seen Gordon twice and that kid, IMHO, is not a franchise guy and probably has the best chance at being a bust. I would take McDermott over Gordon as a player.

[wahz]

I'm going to give up on this thread.  To be CLEAR, I don't think its a "two man draft." I do think you have two guys who are going to be sure thing NBA stars. I think you then MAY have other guys who are as good but I think the odds are you have a possible Dr. J and a possible Hakeem and than a drop off to Zach Randolph and then Bobby Dandrige knock offs. The rest of the draft can be good but I think Embiid and Parker are the guys who will have by far, the best NBA careers and I'd be looking to move up to two.

The main point was how do we move up to 2 from say 6 without losing too many assets?