funny thing is on another board we had an "all time NBA draft" and this guy I know selected Michael first, and Scottie 2nd for the same reason................. lol..................nah but imo Paul is already one of the best to had ever play the position. Screw the "he's still young" talk, I've seen a lot of great PGs and he's better than a lot of them when looking at his complete game.
Wade is NOT better than Payton or Pippen, that's crazy. Pippen lead the Bulls to 55 wins the year after Jordan left and let the team in pts, assts, steals and was 2nd in rebounding. They lost to the New York Thugs who played like a hockey team with all the clutch and grabbing they did. Payton lead his team to the finals and lost to Jordan and the Bulls. Considering Jordan is 6-0 in the NBA finals, I think we can forgive Payton and anyone else that ran into the Bulls for not winning it all. Kinda like any great player that had to go up against the 8-peat Boston Celtics Also, Wade, CP3 and LeBron have not PROVEN themselves over the duration of a career compared to other great players who have IMO. Being able to have a great year or two like Wade and CP3 is one thing, having done it for 10+ years is another. I mean what if Wade never plays more than 70 games in a season for the rest of his career? Sorry but guys who couldn't get on the court are not considered great regardless of how good they looked. If that were the case, there are 3 very talented players who should have already been picked then, but they were not able to consistently produce on the court due to injuries etc. that's how I feel about it. Drafting those guys is like drafting on potential as to what they MIGHT accomplish the rest of their career. That makes little to no sense when there are 10,000+ players to choose from.
but that's assuming he continues to play at this level and doesn't get banged up due to his small size. He's already had an injury plagued season and hasn't played 82 games once! He could be the next Terrell Brandon for all you know. I'd have taken Kidd and Cousy long before I gave thought to 3 year vet. This is an all-era draft. To me it's about what a person accomplished in their career because you can't sit here and talk about how CP3 is a better athlete than Cousy.. of course he is, basketball has evolved 10 times over since it was played in the 50's/60's. But Cousy was the greatest PG of all time until Oscar Robinson showed up and he was a winner on top of that. CP3 has had 2 good and 1 great year.
To me it is about peak years. Like if you could travel back in time and get someone close to their prime and add them to a fictional team. :O We're pretending to have a five-on-five game so I don't really care so much about career accomplishments. Paul was pretty solid in the post-season too... The guy brought David West and a more run-down Peja to the second seed in the West. Last year was better than any year I've seen Steve Nash have for example.
so having 1-2 great years is good enough? then how is Rick Barry not that good then? He was always one of the top 5 (usually top 3) scorers in the league, regardless of pace that's where he ranked, he was a solid rebounder from the wing and passed the ball up well enough for a SG/SF. His first 3 years in the NBA/ABA were monsterous.
Well Cousy was not a great passer to me, even disregarding pace. I think you should have gone with Kidd/Nash if you were going that route.
I still hate you for picking the Mailman Shaq and Malone? that's a d-line in football. Good golly they could bench press a volvo nice team so far, no doubt, but how will Shaq Guard Magic when I switch him to Center for the deciding game in our match up
Rick Barry isn't good? I don't think I said that and we pretty much agree on him. Also players seem to have inflated stats in the ABA as well.
you DO realise that prior to the 80's assists were awarded less by the statisticians right? There was a significant difference on the average of assists handed out per basket pre 1980 and post 1980. At todays average I think cousy would have had nearly 2,000 more career assists. (I think)
Indeed I do, it has to do with "intangibles". However the difference is I do not rely on them for my case.
You said he was picked too early and wasn't that much different between VC and Ray Allen. I was asking about your logic of taking players based on their prime and not their entire career. Barry had some great prime years (only one of those 3 years was in the ABA)
no it has to do with how assists were awarded in those era's. There were more strict on what is an assist and what isn't an assist. Today's stats are more lenient with awarding an assist.
Absolutely not, that is not an intangible I was referring to. How far back some of these players played makes me cringe.
I see, it's just that you quoted my comment about how assists were scored differently in previous era's so it seemed like you were commenting on that. not taking intangibles into account is doing a HUGE disservice to the game. It's what makes great players great. For example Magic Johnson is not the all time assists leader, yet he is the games best passer. How? It was the manner in which he achieved his assists the way he delivered them to players on the break or thread a needle to a cutting player. It's also why Larry Bird is one of the 5 best passer ever too. No stat shows HOW you got a basket or assist or WHEN just that you did do it. the HOW and WHEN are important intangibles when assessing a player.
I'm sitting here making my list of players I want to draft, and it's so hard to put them in order. It's hard to tell who are reaches and who are steals cause alot of the players are all great. That and everytime I make 2 picks, I have to wait 28 picks before the next 2....so I might have to reach just out of fear of not getting the guy I want. I should really sleep.
