Simple question--if you're drafting, are you more concerned with a pick's floor or his ceiling? Safe pick or risk/reward? Seek the boom or avoid the bust? Or, for those who want a more specific scenario & question--say we get Jersey's pick at 6, and the first five off the board are Davis, Drummond, MKG, Robinson, and Beal. How would you define "BPA" at that point (floor/ceiling/both?), who fits that criteria, and why?
Well Roy was considered a safe pick because he wasn't supposed to have a great ceiling. He turned out to be a superstar quality SG.
Or with solid players. Personally, I think that solid players are pretty easy to come by with an owner who will slightly overpay them. I think that we need to swing for the fences and get a guy (or two) that simply is too good to acquire as a free agent. Ed O.
He wasn't a lotto pick, but I remember that Nolan Smith was supposed to be a "low ceiling, high floor" kind of guy ... so much for that. I'm almost always in favor of swinging for the fences over the "safe" pick. Think about it like this: guess what the difference is between missing on a high risk guy vs. hitting on the low ceiling guy? Not a fucking thing; neither type of player will push you to contention.
In the abstract, I'd say "swing for the fences - what have we got to lose!!??" But when I look at the players this would most apply to (because they have great talent but major question marks), like Andre Drummond Harrison Barnes Perry Jones Terrence Jones Austin Rivers Tony Wroten ...I start feeling all risk-averse. Once all the "can't miss" prospects are gone, I'd be in favor of trading. Having said that, I think it depends on the reasons why they're "high risk". With the above players, it seems to be mental issues like lack of effort or space-cadet-ness. That would be a major red flag for me. But there are players that are deficient in certain respects that I would gamble on, in particular: good defenders who play hard but can't shoot, or in general players with a "motor" even if they're a little short or thin (like Joakim Noah or, I realize now, Faried). Or if they have a rare skill that makes others better, like Kendall Marshall. So, long story short, there's no simple answer.
Both. You look at the celing, but evaluate how likely it is that they reach it. Thabeet had a very high celing, but also a very low floor. With his work ethic, reaching anywhere near his celing was a low probablility (see how he plays now after 3 years in the league). You look for the highest celing with the highest floor. For example Davis - Multiple All star celing, Noah floor. (Likely close to celing) Drummand - Bynum celing, Thabeet floor. (Likely Darko level player). Barnes - Granger celing, Matt Barns floor (that is not a bad thing). Likely just above floor level (Batum level).
I think Drummond has a Kwame floor, personally. even if his offense never comes around, i think he can be a really good defender in the league like kwame is.
I still doubt we keep both picks, however, to go with the question, I'd look at a little of both, and a combination. Sitting at 6 and 11, let's say, I'd go with Barnes at 6. I think he's a guy can score in the league for sure, and can likely get you 15 a night, with more, obviously, depending on his chances. But I think he can put up 15 on a good team, and maybe a generous floor, 18 on a bad team, like Demar Derozan. Howver, there is still that high ceiling potential that he coould develop into more of a playmaker as he matures, what was thought of him coming out of HS, and becomes a guy who can truly carry a team. Can see some Rudy Gay similarities to him. Is he a true #1 Franchise changing, title winning guy? No. Can he be a go to wing scorer with a good down low complement like LMA? Absolutely. So I go Barnes at 6, and then Perry Jones 11. Go all in on upside here, with the thought that if out of the two picks, worst case scenario, I get a rotation wing giving me 15-18 a night, then ok. I go home in 2 years with just Barnes. However, maybe playing alongside better players, his tendency to float will not be as glaring, maybe he will find extra motivation, who knows. He reminds me a little of Lamar Odom, and can see a similar path for him of starting off more as a SF, with some time at PF, and then switching as he ages to more of a PF with some time as SF. He will be a mismatch on the court, and a lineup if all went well of PG.Batum/Barnes/Jones/Aldridge could be an intriguing one.
I would bet Sly's right testicle that he doesn't have that floor. Shit most the high school centers are better than Thabeet. I think Drummand's floor is like what RR7 said. He has a Kwame-type floor; but at least has "big hands". Kwame has PG sized hands; which is odd. So I think Drummond would be just a tad better than Kwame at his worst.
I am surprised at all of the Barnes supporters on the board. He seemed to have a hard time getting his own shot at Carolina. I can't imagine he is going to be able to be very effective in the pros. If he is there with our pick at 10ish, then it's a no brainer, but higher scares me. As for ceiling vs floor, I think it depends on the where you are picking. Ideally you look at both. I certainly have my criteria for drafting players, and it's certainly been hit and miss. I wanted nothing to do with Roy, but also thought Aldridge would be the best player in the draft. Everything being equal, like injuries, I think you have to go with ceiling. Floor seems to get teams to the playoffs, but nothing more, where as ceiling can land you that "it" guy that carries your team to the finals.
So what if Portland wins #2? Obviously #1 is a no-brainer; but the two right after him looks scary to me.
Then again, so was Brandon Roy. Agreed. He, Jones III, and Drummond are the three guys I really want to stay away from, and it's not really because I'm risk averse. It's more because I think they will suck in the NBA.
You all have some great points. The telling fact will be what player will best fit into our system. We really do not have a system in place going forward. I see guys on our roster that in other systems would get more time and fit in better, let alone try to guess who would do better here. Oh, and the reason we were able to get Roy in the first place was his knee concerns to begin with.
