Posted by Solace:

^ I see that posting the same thing three times is considered consistency. j/k

JW, you're making bad assumptions. No, getting value is based on the very high likelihood that you can get the player later in the draft, so why not trade for a draft pick that teams give away for a few million, and take the player you want, plus another player? That's all. All the lovers on the board won't acknowledge that Frye at #8, Balkman at #20, Chandler at #40 were all picked MUCH higher than they likely would've gone without Isiah's involvement --

Posted by Solace:

^ I see that posting the same thing three times is considered consistency. j/k

JW, you're making bad assumptions. No, getting value is based on the very high likelihood that you can get the player later in the draft, so why not trade for a draft pick that teams give away for a few million, and take the player you want, plus another player? That's all. All the lovers on the board won't acknowledge that Frye at #8, Balkman at #20, Chandler at #40 were all picked MUCH higher than they likely would've gone without Isiah's involvement -- they only acknowledge that they like the player, which was never the issue. Then to top it off, we get criticized for suggesting the Isiah should've taken it into account. He's done this at least a few times already, so it seems like Isiah's mindset is: "I want this player", when maybe it would be more beneficial to think, "I want this player, but he's a reach at this slot, let me take another player at this slot and use the my next pick/trade for another pick to get this player".

[Edited by - Solace on Jul 27 2007 4:09 PM]

Posted by sebstar:

I think you're making a bad assumption by putting too much credence into the rumor mill and mock drafts. Its so easy sitting behind a comp and saying that Zeke should just draft a net favorite, and then get the player HE wants later. Its also terribly unfair. I'd rather him potentially overreach, and grab a Balkman higher than experts prognosticated, than gamble and watch a Balkman become an All-Star for the Bucks or whomever.

Now whether he could buy picks is another debate, but I dont think its as cut and dried as people make it out. Just give him credit for making good picks and showing some balls....of course when it applies. But to me, your take just smacks as criticism for criticism's sake. Who cares about "value" thats nerd ish --- who can play and who cant?

Posted by Pharzeone:

Solace are you going to get on Thorn for drafting Williams so high? He was ranked on many boards as a second round pick or late first round pick. Why not trade down to get him?

Posted by Solace:

Posted by sebstar:

I think you're making a bad assumption by putting too much credence into the rumor mill and mock drafts. Its so easy sitting behind a comp and saying that Zeke should just draft a net favorite, and then get the player HE wants later. Its also terribly unfair. I'd rather him potentially overreach, and grab a Balkman higher than experts prognosticated, than gamble and watch a Balkman become an All-Star for the Bucks or whomever.

Now whether he could buy picks is another debate, but I dont think its as cut and dried as people make it out. Just give him credit for making good picks and showing some balls....of course when it applies. But to me, your take just smacks as criticism for criticism's sake. Who cares about "value" thats nerd ish --- who can play and who cant?

I disagree and think you're being too nitpicky for not acknowledging that there is a point to this. It's kind of like making an investment. Let's say you're buying stock, right. How about you pay $80 for a stock that soared to $100. Okay, not bad, you made money. But... if it was well known that you could've gotten the stock for $40, if you felt it was so hot, why did you choose to pay more?

Sorry, but there's no way in hell Balkman was going anywhere close to #20; most projections had him late SECOND round or undrafted -- he was on nobody's radar. Frye wasn't going anywhere close to #8 until it was known that Isiah wanted him. Chandler probably would've gone mid second round.

But again, honestly, you guys REFUSE to accept the notion that there might be a point to this, so why discuss it?

Posted by Pharzeone:

Posted by COSSUCKS:

Drafting NBA players is not picking stocks. Most public stocks have a near unlimited amount of shares to buy on the open market. There was one Balkman (who I did not want drafted at 20) and one Chandler who I'm fine with at 23.

If those are the players you want and you cant be certain somebody else will not draft them then you go get them not taking a chance somebody else will get them.

Some people said we took Lee too early and that he wouldnt have gone till the 2nd round. How did that turn out?

Actually during the 2005 draft nite many of these same posters thought Lee should not have been pick. Taft and Blantche were the names that were popular with that 30th pick. Ironic enough I remember most were very happy with Robinson selection and the trade but they were unhappy with Frye over Bynum, Granger and Green. Now Lee is view as a no brainer pick.

Posted by Pharzeone:

Solace it's a forum. Do you honestly think that your opinions should just be express without debate? Also, haven't you participated in threads where you disagree with someone's else opinion. It works both ways. No harm, no foul sort of thing. You bring up your point of view and others may agree or disagree with them. Healthy debate unless it's Isles where obsession becomes part of it.