Author Topic: 2011 NBA Draft ages like a fine wine  (Read 1629 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

2011 NBA Draft ages like a fine wine
« on: March 03, 2017, 06:30:07 AM »

Offline slightly biased bias fan

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1198
  • Tommy Points: 310
This is the draft that seem to keep going from strength to strength as is IMO a perfect example of you don't need the 1st pick to get a generational talent.

This draft is essentially only 5 years old and has already produced 6 NBA Champions, 6 All-Stars, 3 All-NBA and potentially 3 + Hall of Famers.

If you rank the players on their two way talent you can see you don't need a top pick to have a top player:

#15 Kawhi Leonard, #30 Jimmy Butler, #1 Kyrie Irving, #60 Isaiah Thomas, #11 Klay Thompson, #9 Kemba Walker.

There is also plenty of great talents that may never be an All-Star but are extremely talented, Tristan Thompson, Morris twins, Nikola Vučević, Reggie Jackson, Bojan Bogdanović ect.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2017, 01:39:32 PM by slightly biased bias fan »

Re: 2011 NBA Draft ages like a fine wine
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2017, 09:19:51 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
don't forget:
solid players: Kanter, Valanciunas, Harris, Faried, Joseph, Parsons, Bertas (42)
decent players: Biyombo (at 7 a bit high), Knight, Shumpert, Moteijunas, Mirotic, Cole, Singler, Mack, Leuer, Lavoy Allen (50), E'Twaun Moore (55)

picks that were busts (for their draft slots): Derrick Williams (2), Jan Vesely (6), Jimmer Fredette (10), Alec Burks (11), Singleton (18), Nolan Smith (21 but at this point in the twenties are they really busts), Brooks (25), Jujuan Johnson (27)

Re: 2011 NBA Draft ages like a fine wine
« Reply #2 on: March 03, 2017, 01:38:31 PM »

Offline slightly biased bias fan

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1198
  • Tommy Points: 310
don't forget:
solid players: Kanter, Valanciunas, Harris, Faried, Joseph, Parsons, Bertas (42)
decent players: Biyombo (at 7 a bit high), Knight, Shumpert, Moteijunas, Mirotic, Cole, Singler, Mack, Leuer, Lavoy Allen (50), E'Twaun Moore (55)

picks that were busts (for their draft slots): Derrick Williams (2), Jan Vesely (6), Jimmer Fredette (10), Alec Burks (11), Singleton (18), Nolan Smith (21 but at this point in the twenties are they really busts), Brooks (25), Jujuan Johnson (27)

Very true great point, Kanter, Valanciunas, Harris and Faried especially are very solid starters on a championship level team.

Also somehow in only 5 years, four first round picks, including three of the top four, Kyrie Irving, Derrick Williams, Tristan Thompson, and Iman Shumpert would all eventually become teammates on the Cleveland Cavaliers.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2017, 01:49:04 PM by slightly biased bias fan »

Re: 2011 NBA Draft ages like a fine wine
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2017, 03:13:41 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
I've been following this for awhile, because the 2011 draft was widely regarded as a bad one, especially after several likely entrants stayed in school another year due to the lockout. It's still not a very good draft at the top but one of the deepest in recent memory. 3 All-Stars including 2 legit MVP candidates and a Finals MVP, all picked outside the lottery, is pretty stellar.

Re: 2011 NBA Draft ages like a fine wine
« Reply #4 on: March 03, 2017, 03:32:17 PM »

Offline Boris Badenov

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5227
  • Tommy Points: 1065
It makes perfect sense that "weak drafts" will get many of their better players from outside the top picks, because a draft's strength tends to be based on how good the top picks are projected to be.

2013 is another example, as of now the top 5 players by Win Shares are from outside the top 10.

And then on the other end, the "great" drafts end up with their best players coming at the top. (2003 being the ultimate example, and 2007 being another). Which is of course why they were seen as great leading up to the draft.

I think the lesson here is more specific than "you don't need to draft at the top to get All-NBA talent."

It's more like "if you are trying to get an All-NBA talent outside of the top 10, try to do it in a draft perceived as weak."

So, it says that maybe having 3 picks in the 15-20 range is better than one in the top 5, if the draft is perceived as weak. Which is certainly not what you'd see in a good draft (like 2017), where trading into the top 5 will require a huge price.

But still, if you want to maximize the odds of getting an All-NBA talent, the best way by far is to get a top-3 pick in a strong draft.

Re: 2011 NBA Draft ages like a fine wine
« Reply #5 on: March 03, 2017, 03:46:17 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
It makes perfect sense that "weak drafts" will get many of their better players from outside the top picks, because a draft's strength tends to be based on how good the top picks are projected to be.

It does, but more remarkably there aren't many (perceived) weak drafts whose best players stand up so well against classes that were more positively regarded.

Kyrie/Kawhi/Klay/IT/Butler (in whatever order) is a top 5 that looks good even against most drafts whose best players were picked early.

Re: 2011 NBA Draft ages like a fine wine
« Reply #6 on: March 03, 2017, 03:50:48 PM »

Offline Dannys Chipotle Guy

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 279
  • Tommy Points: 48
It makes perfect sense that "weak drafts" will get many of their better players from outside the top picks, because a draft's strength tends to be based on how good the top picks are projected to be.

2013 is another example, as of now the top 5 players by Win Shares are from outside the top 10.

And then on the other end, the "great" drafts end up with their best players coming at the top. (2003 being the ultimate example, and 2007 being another). Which is of course why they were seen as great leading up to the draft.

I think the lesson here is more specific than "you don't need to draft at the top to get All-NBA talent."

It's more like "if you are trying to get an All-NBA talent outside of the top 10, try to do it in a draft perceived as weak."

So, it says that maybe having 3 picks in the 15-20 range is better than one in the top 5, if the draft is perceived as weak. Which is certainly not what you'd see in a good draft (like 2017), where trading into the top 5 will require a huge price.

But still, if you want to maximize the odds of getting an All-NBA talent, the best way by far is to get a top-3 pick in a strong draft.
Ive had a theory that if a draft is considered weak it is usually just because the best prospects havent been identified.

My theory falls apart when you think about it, but every now and then I look at a draft like this one and wonder if theres any truth to it.

Re: 2011 NBA Draft ages like a fine wine
« Reply #7 on: March 03, 2017, 03:50:59 PM »

Offline Boris Badenov

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5227
  • Tommy Points: 1065
It makes perfect sense that "weak drafts" will get many of their better players from outside the top picks, because a draft's strength tends to be based on how good the top picks are projected to be.

It does, but more remarkably there aren't many (perceived) weak drafts whose best players stand up so well against classes that were more positively regarded.

Kyrie/Kawhi/Klay/IT/Butler (in whatever order) is a top 5 that looks good even against most drafts whose best players were picked early.

Oh yeah, I certainly agree with that. I did some comparisons when writing my post and all those numbers that OP mentioned (#AS, #All-NBA) are high compared to most other recent drafts.