PDA

View Full Version : Top 5 Picks



OakMoses
05-12-2008, 11:40 AM
How often are top five draft picks actually "franchise" players?

Let's look at some drafts. It's too early to tell with the last two or three drafts, but we can start with 2006 anyway. Here's the draft year, top 5 picks, and the number of "franchise-type" players in the group.

2006 - Bargnani, Aldridge, Morrison, Thomas, Williams - 0
2005 - Bogut, M. Williams, D. Williams, Paul, Felton - 2
2004 - Howard, Okafor, Gordon, Livingston, Harris - 1
2003 - James, Milicic, Anthony, Bosh, Wade - 4
2002 - Ming, Williams, Dunleavy, Gooden, Skita - 1
2001 - Brown, Chandler, Gasol, Curry, Richardson - 1
2000 - Martin, Swift, Miles, Fizer, Miller - 0
1999 - Brand, Francis, Davis, Odom, Bender - 2 (Brand, Davis)
1998 - Olowokandi, Bibby, LaFrentz, Jamison, Carter - 0
1997 - Duncan, Van Horn, Billups, Daniels, Battie - 2
1996 - Iverson, Camby, Abdur-Rahim, Marbury, Allen - 1
1995 - Smith, McDyess, Stackhouse, Wallace, Garnett - 1
1994 - Robinson, Kidd, Hill, Marshall, Howard - 1
1993 - Webber, Bradley, Hardaway, Mashburn, Bradley - 1
1992 - O'Neal, Mourning, Laettner, Jackson, Ellis - 2
1991 - Johnson, Anderson, Owens, Mutombo, Smith - 1 (Mutombo)
1990 - Coleman, Payton, Jackson, Scott, Gill - 1
1989 - Ellison, Ferry, Elliot, Rice, Reid - 0
1988 - Manning, Smith, Smits, Morris, Richmond - 1 (Manning)
1987 - Robinson, Gilliam, Hopson, Williams, Pippen - 2
1986 - Daugherty, Bias, Washburn, Person, Walker - 0

That's 21 years of drafting, 105 picks, 24 franchise players, or 22.8% of top five picks that become franchise players.

I'm sure there will be arguments of the arbitrary designation of "franchise" player. For me it came down to this: "Was this guy, or could this guy be, the best player on a contending team?" If the answer was yes, I gave them the benefit of the doubt.

NapTonius Monk
05-12-2008, 11:49 AM
Who are you assigning franchise level status to from the 2001 draft?

2001 - Brown, Chandler, Gasol, Curry, Richardson - 1

Kwame-no
Chandler -nice player, but franchise? no
Gasol-not really. He's excellent in LA as a #2
Eddie Curry-no
J-Rich-no

MyFavMartin
05-12-2008, 12:11 PM
I'd imagine if you just took a look at the top 2 picks, the % of franchise players increases, thereby suggesting #3-5 wouldn't be much better than #6-10.

Opened yourself for a lot of criticism with the list, but I understand your point.

I don't think that because you have a quality player from outside the top 5 though that means they won't be better than a top five pick. What gets me is people saying we should trade Danny cause he's not a top five pick. Well neither were Pierce (#10), Reggie Miller (#11), Dr. J (#12), Kobe (#13), Karl Malone (#13), Clyde Drexler (#14), Peja (#14), Shawne Kemp (#17), JO (#17), Josh Smith (#17), and David West (#18), Al Jefferson (#15), Steve Nash (#15), Ron Artest (#16), and Turkoglu (#16).

Good article at: http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=3320375

While doing this research, I found that Scottie Pippen was acquired by Chicago in a trade for Olden Polynice, which I might have known at some time in the past... but wow.

Of course, we'll never forget the Sam Bowie over Jordan pick of 1984.

idioteque
05-12-2008, 12:15 PM
Dikembe Mutumbo a franchise player? A great player to have on your team even now, yes, but you wouldn't want him to be the best player on your team, either.

Speed
05-12-2008, 12:18 PM
Que Croz24.

NapTonius Monk
05-12-2008, 12:32 PM
Que Croz24.

:lmao:

Will Galen
05-12-2008, 12:50 PM
We need to define what a 'Franchise Player" is so everyone can more or less get on the same page. Wikipedia defines it this way.

Franchise Player is a modern term used in sports (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports) to describe an athlete who is not simply the best player on their team, but a player that the team can build their franchise around for the foreseeable future.

Does anyone have a source for any other definitions that aren't there own?

I specified 'not the posters own' because we need to get on the same page, and having 300 posters with their own definition of a word just leads to semantical arguments.

OakMoses
05-12-2008, 01:04 PM
I can agree with not labeling Gasol and Mutombo as franchise players. I decided to err on the side of too many rather than too few.

Gasol was by far the best player on some pretty good Grizzly teams. They got swept in the playoffs every year though, so you can't really call them contenders.

The point, of course, is to point out that top five picks, much more often than not, do not turn around the fortunes of franchises.

Trader Joe
05-12-2008, 01:22 PM
Mutombo is a franchise player, but Carter or Jamison is not? You're gonna have a tough time selling me that one. Same goes for a guy like Gasol.

croz24
05-12-2008, 01:40 PM
i question some of the players you have and haven't labeled as "franchise players". regardless, there are some damn good players in that list you didn't label as "franchise"...nobody ever said it was a guarantee that we'd find a franchise player with the top 5 pick. the only guarantee is that the pacers standing pat will result in even more mediocrity...do pacers fans realize that we've NEVER won an nba title using essentially the exact same philosophy since the 70s?

you guys will come around. i was treated the same way when i was the first to say we needed to trade jalen, austin, and jo. it might take 2 more yrs, but eventually you'll agree. don't worry though, i won't require any apologies...

avoidingtheclowns
05-12-2008, 02:18 PM
at least I know where the damn shift key is... :)

hey hey hey, that was uncalled for...

Speed
05-12-2008, 02:23 PM
hey hey hey, that was uncalled for...

You're right, the guy just does a bunch different things that are bothersome/annoying to me - I'll delete it though. I may struggle this long offseason keeping focus.

Rajah Brown
05-12-2008, 02:23 PM
croz24-

You're wasting your time and energy man. I'm not even sure that a
plurality on this board would trade DG for Rose. If not, that oughta
make it clear what you're up against.

Trader Joe
05-12-2008, 02:25 PM
croz24-

You're wasting your time and energy man. I'm not even sure that a
plurality on this board would trade DG for Rose. If not, that oughta
make it clear what you're up against.

Let's find out.

croz24
05-12-2008, 02:26 PM
this message board is too 'harmonious' in their opinions, especially for a team that doesn't win...it needs some attitude, much like the pacers...

avoidingtheclowns
05-12-2008, 02:39 PM
You're right, the guy just does a bunch different things that are bothersome/annoying to me - I'll delete it though. I may struggle this long offseason keeping focus.

i'm fine with your other assessment. i just won't stand for anti-capitlization bigotry. ;)

Speed
05-12-2008, 02:42 PM
i'm fine with your other assessment. i just won't stand for anti-capitlization bigotry. ;)

Oh right, you mean shift-keyily challenged, sorry it's my upbringing, my Grandparents were way worse, that whole generation really.

OakMoses
05-12-2008, 03:12 PM
i question some of the players you have and haven't labeled as "franchise players". regardless, there are some damn good players in that list you didn't label as "franchise"...nobody ever said it was a guarantee that we'd find a franchise player with the top 5 pick. the only guarantee is that the pacers standing pat will result in even more mediocrity...do pacers fans realize that we've NEVER won an nba title using essentially the exact same philosophy since the 70s?


Actually, I don't disagree with you. I have no problem with the team making a big move. If Bird, Simon, and Morway have an opportunity to trade Granger for a player they believe is going to be a star, I have no problems with that. Right now, however, if they had an offer to trade Granger for the #5 pick in the draft and they took it, I'd be upset because you have no idea who they'll get at #5. You make moves for players, not for picks.

My point wasn't to argue over who's a franchise player and who's not, the point was to say that, even with all the time, money, and energy NBA teams invest in the draft, a top five pick does not guarantee you a future star any more than the #11 pick does. I'll guarantee you that there's an all-star caliber player who will be picked after pick #10 in this year's draft. We've just got to hope that he winds up going to us at pick #11.

SycamoreKen
05-12-2008, 03:13 PM
How often are top five draft picks actually "franchise" players?

Let's look at some drafts. It's too early to tell with the last two or three drafts, but we can start with 2006 anyway. Here's the draft year, top 5 picks, and the number of "franchise-type" players in the group.

2006 - Bargnani, Aldridge, Morrison, Thomas, Williams - 0
2005 - Bogut, M. Williams, D. Williams, Paul, Felton - 2
2004 - Howard, Okafor, Gordon, Livingston, Harris - 1
2003 - James, Milicic, Anthony, Bosh, Wade - 4
2002 - Ming, Williams, Dunleavy, Gooden, Skita - 1
2001 - Brown, Chandler, Gasol, Curry, Richardson - 0
2000 - Martin, Swift, Miles, Fizer, Miller - 0
1999 - Brand, Francis, Davis, Odom, Bender - 0
1998 - Olowokandi, Bibby, LaFrentz, Jamison, Carter - 0
1997 - Duncan, Van Horn, Billups, Daniels, Battie - 1
1996 - Iverson, Camby, Abdur-Rahim, Marbury, Allen - 1
1995 - Smith, McDyess, Stackhouse, Wallace, Garnett - 1
1994 - Robinson, Kidd, Hill, Marshall, Howard - 1
1993 - Webber, Bradley, Hardaway, Mashburn, Bradley - 0
1992 - O'Neal, Mourning, Laettner, Jackson, Ellis - 1
1991 - Johnson, Anderson, Owens, Mutombo, Smith - 0
1990 - Coleman, Payton, Jackson, Scott, Gill - 0
1989 - Ellison, Ferry, Elliot, Rice, Reid - 0
1988 - Manning, Smith, Smits, Morris, Richmond - 0
1987 - Robinson, Gilliam, Hopson, Williams, Pippen - 1
1986 - Daugherty, Bias, Washburn, Person, Walker - 0

That's 21 years of drafting, 105 picks, 24 franchise players, or 22.8% of top five picks that become franchise players.

I'm sure there will be arguments of the arbitrary designation of "franchise" player. For me it came down to this: "Was this guy, or could this guy be, the best player on a contending team?" If the answer was yes, I gave them the benefit of the doubt.

I went through and bolded the players I thought ended up being franchise palyers, not where they were when drafted. I almost took Kidd off the list since he has only been to the finals once and never won. I did remove Pippin from your group since he never won without Jordan. I find it really hard to lable a guy a "franchise" player if he has been traded, especially if he has been traded more than once.

NuffSaid
05-12-2008, 03:38 PM
Actually, I don't disagree with you. I have no problem with the team making a big move. If Bird, Simon, and Morway have an opportunity to trade Granger for a player they believe is going to be a star, I have no problems with that. Right now, however, if they had an offer to trade Granger for the #5 pick in the draft and they took it, I'd be upset because you have no idea who they'll get at #5. You make moves for players, not for picks.
It kinda depends on who you're giving up and why.

I could easily see giving up Daniels, Harrison and Williams for a decent PG or Center and/or a draft pick, but giving up Granger or Dunleavy straight-up for one, for example, wouldn't make any sense whatsoever. Bottom line, it a "player(s) for picks" trade is to happen w/the Pacers they should use their reserves and not their "core" players.


My point wasn't to argue over who's a franchise player and who's not, the point was to say that, even with all the time, money, and energy NBA teams invest in the draft, a top five pick does not guarantee you a future star any more than the #11 pick does. I'll guarantee you that there's an all-star caliber player who will be picked after pick #10 in this year's draft. We've just got to hope that he winds up going to us at pick #11.
'Nuff Said.

Trader Joe
05-12-2008, 03:45 PM
Also would you really consider Danny Manning a franchise player? The dude averaged 14 PPG on his career.

DisplacedKnick
05-12-2008, 03:46 PM
Rather than arguing what a franchise player is, I'd look at drafts and add up the number of all-star game appearances over a given period for players picked at certain spots.

Frex, since 1990 how many total all-star appearances have been from players selected 1-5 vs 6-10 vs 11-15 and so on.

I'm too lazy to do that myself but if someone is REALLY bored . . .

croz24
05-12-2008, 04:15 PM
the reason i want a top 5 pickTHIS YEAR, is because i view this draft as being close to the same as the 2003 draft...there are at least FOUR legit instant impact, franchise players imo in this draft and i just want to get my hands on one of them...

Pig Nash
05-12-2008, 04:20 PM
Alonzo Mourning was the best player on a lot of contending Heat teams, they could just never get past NY.

MyFavMartin
05-12-2008, 06:16 PM
I'd add brand, kidd, baron, billups, and VC to your list of franshise players. I'm debating CWebb with myself. Tyra is a strong argument in the plus column.

Anthem
05-12-2008, 06:52 PM
there are at least FOUR legit instant impact, franchise players imo in this draft and i just want to get my hands on one of them...
Then wouldn't a top-4 pick be a better target?

Mourning
05-12-2008, 09:48 PM
I think picking 21 years and then looking how many franchise players were picked in the top-5 is a bit skewed. I mean I assume every team only has one franchise player, right? Ok, so 21 years, let's divide that by three to say that every team needs a new franchise players every 7 years.

So, there's 30 teams over 21 year time span you would need about 90 franchise players (assuming there are actually enough franchise players enough in the league called for every team).

That changes your percentages IMO then not giving Carter at Toronto a "franchise player"-flag or Kidd in New Jersey, Ray Allen at the Bucks or Seattle, Davis at the Hornets or now with the Warriors? IMO Webber at the Kings was one. I'm not getting those and there's some more, which IMO again also raises the percentage of franchiseplayers taken.

Just my :twocents:

SoupIsGood
05-12-2008, 10:38 PM
'Nuff Said.


:)

croz24
05-12-2008, 11:32 PM
Then wouldn't a top-4 pick be a better target?

if you're going to quote me, quote my entire statement..."the reason i want a top 5 pickTHIS YEAR, is because i view this draft as being close to the same as the 2003 draft..." was wade a top 4 pick? lopez, like milicic is bound to be drafted before one of those 4...

Eindar
05-12-2008, 11:51 PM
if you're going to quote me, quote my entire statement..."the reason i want a top 5 pickTHIS YEAR, is because i view this draft as being close to the same as the 2003 draft..." was wade a top 4 pick? lopez, like milicic is bound to be drafted before one of those 4...

I'm curious, who are the four players? I can see Rose and possibly Mayo, but I see Beasley as another Shareef Abdur-Rahim, and all the rest of the guys seem to be projects or have limited upside. In fact, I think this draft class has a lot of depth, but is very weak in terms of franchise talent. In that way, I think it's like the anti-2003 draft.

croz24
05-13-2008, 02:14 AM
rose, mayo, beasley, bayless...

Eindar
05-13-2008, 06:05 AM
rose, mayo, beasley, bayless...

So, you're saying that those 4 players are similar to Lebron James, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, and Dwayne Wade? Laughable, and I'm being kind.

Speed
05-13-2008, 08:22 AM
So, you're saying that those 4 players are similar to Lebron James, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, and Dwayne Wade? Laughable, and I'm being kind.


Yikes, the Millicic comparison in Lopez I agree with, sorta.

Is this the statement? That those 4 = Rose, Mayo, Beasley, and Bayless???

I want answers!!! I want the TRUTH!! :dance:

I'm looking for that self proclaimed bold statement...

Will Galen
05-13-2008, 01:33 PM
if you're going to quote me, quote my entire statement..."the reason i want a top 5 pickTHIS YEAR, is because i view this draft as being close to the same as the 2003 draft..." was wade a top 4 pick? lopez, like milicic is bound to be drafted before one of those 4...

Croz do you even realize why most of this board disagrees with you? The above is a perfect example.

Your not advocating trying to trade Granger for Beasley, Rose, Bayless, or Mayo, you want to trade him for a top five pick when one of those four might not even be available.

And instead of admitting you don't really want a top five pick you just want Beasley, Rose, Bayless, or Mayo, you get hardheaded and say Lopez is bound to be drafted before one of those four.

That's one of the reasons you have posters telling you they think your position is laughable.