I think the 1 through 60 ranking approach is actually a lot more valuable, just much more difficult. If you can't make a definitive choice between any two players ("would I rather have player A or player B on my team?"), then you haven't done your homework. The Tier system just helps you gloss over those uncertainties, but in the end, it still comes down to having ranked everyone in the tier head to head.
Just an FYI to those that might have missed it, Olshey said he uses the tier system either during his press conference or in his interview with MB and Wheels afterwards. He basically said if you have a player in tier 3, for example, that was an absolute position of need, he would never draft that player over a tier 2 guy even if we are deep at that position. I just hope they tier guys correctly Here is my attempt for Portland Tier 1: I really don't think there are any franchise players in this draft, but Davis is probably better than everyone else Tier 2: Davis, Robinson Tier 3: Drummond, Beal, Ross, Barnes, MKG Tier 4: Lillard, PJ III, Sullinger, Moultrie, Marshall, Waiters, Jones, Lamb, Rivers, Harkless Tier 5: Leonard, Zeller, Henson My mock 1. Davis 2. Robinson 3. Beal 4. Barnes 5. MKG 6. Drummond (Using the tiers above) Highest tiered player on the board for our needs 7. Sullinger 8. Lillard 9. Henson 10. Rivers 11. Ross (Tier 3 guy still on the board, even though it's not a higher need than say a PG
the "tier system" is crap unless you have good scouting, or else you could have leonard in tier 1 because he "runs fast around cones"
Would be interesting for someone to compile several posters' "tiers" and then rank the top 15-20 prospects based on aggregate. I'm too lazy to do it, but I'd be curious to see how it'd turn out.
That one guy with his Excel sheets has some pretty clear tiers. We should try to get him or her to integrate into this thread. I liked that analysis, and it dovetails nicely into this discussion.
Here is a question that might stir some good debate Is it better to draft one tier 2 guy, or two tier 3 or a tier 3 and 4 guy?
I think I'd rather have a Tier Two than two Threes, because I think you have to have All-NBA players to be able to compete in the league. So I'd pick the Tier Two. After that, though, I'd want to maximize the number of risky players I take. I'd rather take Wroten, for instance, than Sullinger. Wroten could be an Evolutionary Gary Payton, or he could be a large bust. Sullinger could be David West, but he also isn't getting more athletic and he may not be able to hang at the PF spot effectively. If the dice roll comes up 7s on each, on one hand you have an absolute stud PG. On the other, you have a serviceable, effective PF who may or may not be an all-star someday.
My Tiers: This suprised me putting it together this way. Tier One (This category is usually reserved for guys who are surefire All-Stars/franchise players.): Davis Tier Two potential All-Stars: Beal, Robinson Tier Three have NBA All-Star potential, but have significant weaknesses that could keep them from living up to it : Drummond, MKG, PJ3, Barnes Tier 3.5 Long term starters (Crash or Batum level): T. Jones, Zeller, Sullinger Tier Four Fringe starters: Leonard, Barton, Wroten, Lillard, Waiters, Henson, White, Nicholson, Fournier, Taylor, Moultrie, Crowder Tier Five Role players (bench) : Melo, Rivers, Harkless, Ross, J.Lamb, Marshall, Q.Miller, Teague, Jenkins, D.Lamb
Tier 1: Davis, Robinson. Tier 2: Drummond, MKG, Lillard Tier 3: Beal, Ross, Barnes, Waiters, PJ3, T. Jones Tier 4: Sullinger, Moultrie, Henson, Harkless, Teague, Wroten, Rivers, Tier 5: Kendall Marshall, Leonard, Zeller
Depends on the draft if I'd take a tier 2 or two tier 3 players. Last year? Give me 1 tier 2 player. 2009? Two tier 3 players. This year is tough, I'd probably stick with a tier 2 choice over two tier 3. Solely because I think Lillard, Drummond both fill needs as well as being BPA (in my rankings). So I'd rather have one of them, than 2 of Beal, ross, Barnes, waiters, PJ3 or t Jones, which would all be luxury picks - except maybe Waiters, and I'm not nearly as high on Beal as some others are.
Thought of this when mentioned in a different thread, or similarly. How does one exactly define BPA? It was mentioned in Lillard over Drummond. I still would go Drummond, personally, but it made me think, when saying best player available, how is it defined? Do you say well Drummond has more potential, so he is best available? Do you say best right now? best fit? Best pro overall? Who you think is most likely to hit their ceiling? Whether you think Drummond is likely to hit 60% of his ceiling, but that is equal to 95% of Lillard's ceiling, and you think Lillard only gets to 90? How do you choose who is best?
