I would take Duncan, for sure, but calling guys like Drummond and Davis "role players" is a little absurd. There's a pretty wide gap between "transformational player" and "role player." You can be a star in the league and not even be one of the top 10 players. That's why there's stars and then there's superstars. Dame seems to be on the cusp of being a superstar. Davis seems to have taken a step backwards. He was definitely right on that superstar line last year.
I don't mean to diminish post players importance just by calling them role players. They are important too. I'm just saying that they're not the most important part of a team in todays NBA.
That's because of rules changes. Removing hand checking was a pretty major advantage for guards and wings. Also, the league is crazy about three pointers right now.
Not to harp on this, because what you are saying is not completely wrong, but it's not like the lottery is a better option. If Vonleh only ever has less than a 10% chance of being in the all-star conversation, what does that say about any other top 10 pick....... every year? That is not exactly making me want to suffer through a lot of bad seasons. Especially watching this year's crop of 18 year olds.
But I'm guessing that's not really the hit rate for high lottery picks. I don't have the time to look it up, but I'm guessing that top 10 picks have a higher average than that of panning out (Vonleh was 9th), but that's why I said I'd take ten years in the lottery for that hypothetical 25% chance.
And let's not discount Olshey's ability to identify the right players to draft. Someone posted an article a while back that illustrated that Olshey has a much better track record with drafting than the average GM.
An article that discusses the odds of drafting impact players from 2014 http://www.crabdribbles.com/nba-draft-over-the-last-15-years-a-statistical-overview/
I was w/ u until u said ^. Draymond is EASILY THE most important part of the GS; w/o him (even w/ Steph & Klay playing every game; don't get me wrong, these guys r phenomenal BUT they're not as important to GS as Draymond is), GS would have dropped quite a few games & they'd b nowhere near chasing & making history/records. People that watch GS games (I've seen almost all), coaches, GS players, & analysts will tell u Draymond is THE most important Warrior (he's what Wes was for us & a bit more even).
Right. None of this exists in a vacuum. If I thought Neil Olshey was a lousy talent evaluator, then I'd be pretty non-plussed about the lottery. I get why he took a flier on Meyers Lemon, because he has rare size and raw athleticism and picking bigs is always a bit of a crapshoot, but Damian, CJ, and Crabbe all point to the conclusion that he might just have an eye for talent. No matter which route is chosen (draft, free agency, or trades) all of them are low probability avenues of success. for Portland, the draft just happens to be the least bad.
You have a better chance of drafting an impact player in the 2nd round of a Good Draft than in the non-lotto first round of a bad draft. As I recall, this summer's draft is a Bad Draft. Do we have a second rounder this summer? If so, we're more likely to find an impact player than if we had a first rounder this year and made the playoffs. It's an odd bit of half-logic; obviously we're twice as likely to find an impact player in the lotto of next summer's draft than in the rest of the draft. BUT! if we're going to make the playoffs anyway, and have a second rounder, not having a late first rounder is kind of okay because it was a bit useless anyway (yeah it raises your chances of finding an impact player some).
Did Green play that one game Curry didn't when the Warriors got their asses handed to them, or did he sit out? I'm inclined to think the guy scoring nearly a point a minute is more important to the final score than Green.
You're assuming that every GM has equal odds of identifying and drafting an impact player. I'd take my chances with Neil
That said, Green IS their second star (20 PER); Klay is the role player (17.8 PER). Maybe we do need a second star if CJ stays at that 18 PER range; that's key role player territory, not Second Star territory. But I'd give CJ a year or two more to grow.
The Warriors are winning with a top-three that were drafted 7 (Curry), 11 (Thompson), and 35 (Green). Curry was seen by many GMs as too skinny and fragile to be worth a top lottery pick, but the Warriors hit a home run on him. Thompson was a solid mid-range pick and again the Warriors beat the odds. Green was off-the-charts lucky to turn out to be the player he is. To build the killer squad that they have, they've been able to pull together a bunch of key supporting players, some of whom were lottery picks but are now on the back side of their careers. The Blazers are working with a big-2 that were a 6 pick (Dame) and a 10 pick (CJ). I'd say that Olshey hit home runs with both. We could really use one of our other guys to move up to a Green level of impact or find that guy through the draft, trade or free agency. We could still end up with a lottery pick this season, but it's likely to be a late one if we do get it. It will take some major luck for that to turn out to be an impact player. Once the core is established, Olshey can use it to entice some of the vets like Golden State has acquired. I don't think that there's a single formula to getting to a championship contender. I do think that it takes smarts, and Olshey has that in spades, and it takes a ton of luck.
Are u talking about the Dal or Mil game? Green played in both. Steph played in the Mil game & it was 1 of his worst of the yr. (still scored 28 though); Steph's unusual # of misses definitely contributed to this loss. I can see how u are "inclined to think the guy scoring nearly a point a minute is more important to the final score than Green," that's what someone would 1st jump to; however, he didn't do that in the Mil game (he scored .8 points per minute this day). W/ Green & GS, you have to watch the games to get the full picture of how important he is to the team; Steph's affect is much more/easier to see in the gaudy stats & Green's impact is partially in the league leading triple-doubles; w/ Green, it's more what doesn't register in the stats. To b clear, I'm not saying Green is the better player/more talented (@ least not in the common metrics way), he IS however more important to GS. ps the only weakness GS has on any kind of a regular basis is being a little too careless w/ the ball, they play @ a pretty fast pace sometimes & when they turn it over, they keep playing fast & turn it over fast also (their TOs seem to come in bunches); they've acknowledged they need to work on this (u really can't fault them much on this because all teams turn it over like this or in different ways/clips but w/ GS it's more noticeable because most of what they do is so good).
Green kind of reminds me of Shawn Marion with the Nash Suns; he gives them the advantages of going small but still the benefits of a big power player. Excellent defensive versatility. Very rare to find a player that can provide those different dimensions.
Without Curry there is no universe where Golden State is winning a title. Without Draymond could they play with Ezeli at the 5, or more Barnes and Iggy small ball and still win a title? I doubt it; but there is a bit of a chance. Both are critical to success. Draymond might result in a more unique style of play than we've ever seen. I'd still rate Curry a tad higher because the team would be better with him if you had to choose between the two of them.
