Posted by fishmike:
its never overrated. The difference between teams that use it and teams that get burned by it is the other moves they make on their roster.
Its just like in baseball when you draft a 17 year old kid who throws 98mph and has thrown 8 no hitters in HS. Maybe he's the next Nolan Ryan, maybe he breaks his hand in a bar fight and you just pissed away a couple mill on minor league deal and a high pick.
Bottom line? Only a handfull of guys that throw a ball that hard.
Just like there is only a handfull of guys that are 6'11 and verticle leaps approaching 4 feet. This is why you balance your pipeline by adding skilled and work ethic next to raw and potential.
Well, it's always the same story. In my opinion, as it was ten years ago, first round picks should be "more or less" "proven" players, and then, with the 2nd round picks you select players with "potential". Of course the later can turn out to be better, but it is the most fair way of doing things. You have to work hard and show things to deserve to be in the NBA. I'm not drafting a guy with my 1st round pick who is 6'11 and has an awesome vertical leap just because of that. I mean, I would draft him if I have seenhim getting a fair amount of rebounds, points or blocks playing at a decent level, not definately HS. This is an example of what happens now:
Player 1:
1st year college - 7 ppg, 4 rpg, 0,7 bpg
2nd year college - 14 ppg, 6 rpg, 1,3 bpg
3rd year college - 18 ppg, 10 rpg, 1,9 bpg (drafted)
Player 2:
1st year college - 11 ppg, 6 bpg, 0,8 bpg (drafted)
And I bet every team would draft the second player just because he is younger and has potential, while the first one has shown good improvement.
This is not maths, and no one knows who will be the better player in the future but I potential is big risk not worth high picks. I think every first round pick should be the leader of his team, not a role player. I'm all for developing young players, but NOT by using top ten picks.
[Edited by - DarkKnicks on 09-12-2005 05:14 AM]