Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

The Best and Worst Draft Picks of the David Stern Era (Hardwood Paroxysm)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Best and Worst Draft Picks of the David Stern Era (Hardwood Paroxysm)

    THE BEST AND WORST DRAFT PICKS OF THE DAVID STERN ERA
    Brian Schroeder


    As I’m sure you’ve heard, this past Thursday’s NBA Draft was the final one for long time commissioner David Stern, who is set to retire in February 2014. In honor of this, and of the 30 years of first round picks he’s made, I decided to make a completely arbitrary and utterly pointless ranking system.

    To start with, I only used the first ten picks of every draft, and then included some of the more successful later round picks from subsequent years. A team drafting a guy who didn’t pan out at #11 isn’t exactly a franchise killer. Drafting that same guy at #1, is another story.

    I used four criteria in my grading system: Playoff success, All-Star games, career success/awards, and loyalty/longevity. The latter two are on a 1-10 scale. If said draft pick played his entire career with the team that drafted him, he gets a 10. If said career was 10 or more years, he might get higher than that. The only players that get a 0 in this field are ones that never became a rotation player for the team that drafted them. Success/awards is out of 10 in multiples of 5. If a player flamed out of the NBA, he gets a 0. If he had a respectable NBA career, he gets a 5. If he was a star player/award winner, he gets a 10. For simplification’s sake, I decided not to differentiate between levels of stardom. Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley both get 10s in this category.

    The other two categories are somewhat trickier. Playoff success is tallied by the amount of appearances said player made in the playoffs with the team that drafted him, divided by two. If that player was part of a championship team, 5 points are added to his tally (one for every title). The final category, All-Star games, is perhaps simpler: however many All-Star games the player appeared in for any team. This will serve to stabilize some of the stranger careers. For instance, Chris Webber will inherently have a higher score than, say, Danny Manning, due to his status as a perennial All-Star. The final scores will reflect the overall success of that pick for the team who made it (or, more precisely, the team that ended up with the player in question when the season in question began).

    0-9: Wasted potential, a player who did not live up the expectations of a top 10 pick for the team that drafted him.

    10-19: Solid pro, perhaps not the star his team needed, but a guy whose NBA career can be considered successful.

    20-29: Low-level star, ranging from solid career starters to borderline Hall of Fame candidates.

    30-39: Superstar, everything a team could have asked for with a top 10 pick and a likely Hall of Famer. Also Derek Fisher.

    40+: Legend, an out and out success in every way imaginable. A franchise cornerstone and best case scenario.


    #1 Pick

    Five Best

    Tim Duncan, 1997. San Antonio Spurs. 61 Points
    Hakeem Olajuwon, 1984. Houston Rockets. 48 Points
    David Robinson, 1987. San Antonio Spurs. 46 Points
    Patrick Ewing, 1985. New York Knicks. 37 Points
    Shaquille O’Neal, 1992. Orlando Magic. 31 Points

    Five Worst

    Kwame Brown, 2001. Washington Wizards. 6 Points
    Pervis Ellison, 1989. Sacramento Kings. 7 Points
    Michael Olowokandi, 1998. Los Angeles Clippers. 8 Points
    Greg Oden, 2007. Portland Trail Blazers. 11 Points
    Joe Smith, 1995. Golden State Warriors. 12 Points

    What’s interesting about the #1 pick is that there aren’t nearly as many out and out busts as you’d imagine. Really, it’s just Olowokandi and Kwame Brown who were bad NBA players. Pervis Ellison had no effect with the Kings, but ended up with a decent career. It’s telling that Joe Smith, consummate NBA journeyman with career averages of 10 points and 6 boards, ranked low enough to qualify for the bottom five. Oden, of course, has been limited by his injuries, but he was not a bad player when he played. In fact, he was quite good, enough that he’s still playing for a comeback.

    Here’s the rest of the list, grouped by score. 29-20: LeBron James (29), Yao Ming, Allen Iverson (28), Derrick Rose, Brad Daugherty (25), Larry Johnson, Blake Griffin (22), Chris Webber (21), Glenn Robinson (20), Kyrie Irving (17), Kenyon Martin, John Wall (16), Anthony Davis, Andrea Bargnani (15), Andrew Bogut, Derrick Coleman (14), Danny Manning (13), Elton Brand (12).


    #2 Pick

    Five Best

    Jason Kidd, 1994, Dallas Mavericks. 32 Points
    Gary Payton, 1990. Seattle SuperSonics. 29 Points
    Kevin Durant, 2007. Seattle SuperSonics. 28 Points
    Alonzo Mourning, 1992. Charlotte Hornets. 22 Points
    Rik Smits, 1988. Indiana Pacers. 22 Points

    Five Worst

    Hasheem Thabeet, 2009. Memphis Grizzlies. 7 Points
    Darko Milicic, 2003. Detroit Pistons. 8 Points
    Jay Williams, 2002. Chicago Bulls. 10 Points
    Stromile Swift, 2000. Vancouver Grizzlies. 10 Points
    Michael Beasley, 2008. Miami Heat. 11 Points

    The #2 pick is, in all honesty, somewhat weak. Only one of these players, Jason Kidd, has won a title with the team that drafted him, and that was at the end of his career, on his second stint with the team. However, there aren’t a huge amount of total busts here, either, although the bottom 5 is full of them, with the exception of Jay Williams, whose career was robbed from his by injury. The rest of the scores follow: LaMarcus Aldridge (20), Marcus Camby (16), Antonio McDyess, Mike Bibby, Danny Ferry (15), Tyson Chandler, Kenny Anderson, Steve Francis, Derrick Williams, Michael Kidd-Gilchrist (14), Sam Bowie, Evan Turner (13), Keith Van Horn, Armen Gilliam, Emeka Okafor, Marvin Williams, Shawn Bradley (12), Wayman Tisdale (11).


    #3 Pick

    Five Best

    Michael Jordan, 1984. Chicago Bulls. 70 Points
    Grant Hill, 1994. Detroit Pistons. 26 Points
    Sean Elliott, 1989. San Antonio Spurs. 26 Points
    Penny Hardaway, 1993. Orlando Magic. 25 Points
    Carmelo Anthony, 2003. Denver Nuggets. 23 Points

    Five Worst

    Chris Washburn, 1986. Golden State Warriors, 7 Points
    Darius Miles, 2000. Los Angeles Clippers. 8 Points
    Adam Morrison, 2006. Charlote Bobcats. 8 Points
    Dennis Hopson, 1987. New Jersey Nets. 9 Points
    Raef LaFrentz, 1998. Denver Nuggets. 10 Points

    MJ aside, the third pick is not particularly interesting. It has its share of stars, and its share of busts, but few were momentous enough to effect the course of a franchise substantially in either direction. Sounds like Otto Porter Jr will fit right in with this crop.

    The rest: Al Horford (23), Deron Williams (20), Pau Gasol, James Harden (19), Chauncey Billups (17), Baron Davis, Mahmoud Abdul-Raud (16), Jerry Stackhouse, Ben Gordon, Derrick Favors, Bradley Beal (15), Christian Laettner (14), O.J. Mayo, Enes Kanter, Benoit Benjamin (13), Mike Dunleavy Jr, Billy Owens (12), Shareef Abdur-Rahim, Charles Smith (11).


    #4 Pick

    Five Best

    Chris Paul, 2005. New Orleans Hornets. 26 Points
    Dikembe Mutombo, 1995. Denver Nuggets. 22 Points
    Chris Bosh, 2003. Toronto Raptors. 22 Points
    Russell Westbrook, 2008. Oklahoma City Thunder. 21 Points
    Rasheed Wallace, 1995. Washington Bullets. 18 Points

    Five Worst

    Marcus Fizer, 2000. Chicago Bulls. 7 Points
    Eddy Curry, 2001. Chicago Bulls. 9 Points
    Wesley Johnson, 2010. Minnesota Timberwolves. 10 Points
    Drew Gooden, 2002. Memphis Grizzlies. 10 Points
    Tyrus Thomas, 2006. Chicago Bulls. 11 Points

    A very average group of guys here at the 4 spot, with the difference between the 5th best and the 5th worst picks being a measly 7 points. Interestingly, none of these picks won a title with the team that drafted them. The vast majority of these picks were solid NBA players without much of an impact. The rest as follows: Mike Conley (18), Dennis Scott, Xavier McDaniel (17), Glen Rice, Sam Perkins (16), Chuck Person, Jamal Mashburn, Antawn Jamison, Lamar Odom, Stephon Marbury, Tristan Thompson (15), Tyreke Evans, Dion Waiters, Antonio Daniels, Chris Morris (14), Jim Jackson (13), Donyell Marshall, Shaun Livingston, Reggie Williams (11)


    #5 Pick

    Five Best

    Scottie Pippen, 1987. Chicago Bulls. 56 Points
    Dwyane Wade, 2003. Miami Heat. 48 Points
    Kevin Garnett, 1995. Minnesota Timberwolves. 39 Points
    Charles Barkley, 1984. Philadelphia 76ers. 34 Points
    Ray Allen, 1996. Milwaukee Bucks. 32 Points

    Five Worst

    Nikoloz Tskitishvili, 2002. Denver Nuggets. 8 Points
    Shelden Williams, 2006. Atlanta Hawks. 9 Points
    Isaiah Rider, 1993. Minnesota Timberwolves. 9 Points
    Thomas Robinson, 2012. Sacramento Kings. 10 Points
    J.R. Reid, 1989. Charlotte Hornets. 11 Points

    The five spot is, by far, the most decorated thus far. While only two of these players won a title with the team that drafted them, those two players combined to win 9 titles, and the other three players in the top are all sure fire Hall of Famers who rank among the best to ever play their respective positions. They were all perennial All-Stars and MVP candidates, and maximized the worth their teams got for them (even Ray Allen fetched a mighty price in return for his services when Milwaukee traded him). This is as good as we’re likely to get. On the flip side, the bad picks here are certainly damaging. I feel bad about putting Thomas Robinson on here after one season, but his usefulness to the Kings is done, so it’s safe to say he was a bad pick for them. Here’s to hoping he makes a career out of it.

    The rest: Vince Carter (22), Mitch Richmond (20), Kevin Love, Steve Smith (19), Ricky Rubio, Jon Koncak, Kenny Walker (16), Jonas Valanciunas, DeMarcus Cousins, Devin Harris (15), Juwan Howard, Kendall Gill, Mike Miller (14), Jeff Green, Jason Richardson (13), Tony Battie, Raymond Felton, LaPhonso Ellis, Jonathan Bender (12)


    #6 Pick

    Five Best

    Brandon Roy, 2006. Portland Trail Blazers. 22 Points
    Antoine Walker, 1996. Boston Celtics. 18 Points
    Wally Szczerbiak, 1999. Minnesota Timberwolves. 17 Points
    Hersey Hawkins, 1988. Los Angeles Clippers. 16 Points
    Shane Battier, 2001. Memphis Grizzlies. 16 Points

    Five Worst

    Dajuan Wagner, 2002. Cleveland Cavaliers. 8 Points
    Jonny Flynn, 2009. Minnesota Timberwolves. 8 Points
    Yi Jianlian, 2007. Milwaukee Bucks. 9 Points
    William Bedford, 1986. Philadelphia 76ers. 9 Points
    DerMarr Johnson, 2000. Atlanta Hawks. 9 Points

    This is the exact opposite of the five slot. Only Brandon Roy could possibly be considered a franchise player, and with his career tragically cut short by injury, he’s hardly the most valuable draft pick in the world. On the flip side, the busts that have come from this spot are massive. Dajuan Wagner is a somewhat forgotten player nowadays, but as a risk-reward pick, he’s one of the worst in the last few decades. To think that he came the year before LeBron is to really put into perspective just how bad that Cavs front office could be. Not sure I would have stayed with the people responsible for Dajuan Wagner when Miami came-a-calling, either.

    The rest: Damian Lillard (15), Stacey King (14), Ekpe Udoh, Kenny Smith (13), Joe Kleine, Tom Gugliotta, Robert Traylor, Chris Kaman, Danilo Gallinari (12), Ron Mercer, Martell Webster, Melvin Turpin, Doug Smith, Calbert Cheaney (11), Felton Spencer, Bryant Reeves, Josh Childress, Sharone Wright, Jan Vesely (10)


    #7 Pick

    Five Best

    Chris Mullin, 1985. Golden State Warriors. 26 Points
    Kevin Johnson, 1987. Phoenix Suns. 23 Points
    Luol Deng, 2004. Chicago Bulls. 22 Points
    Nene Hilario, 2002. Denver Nuggets. 20 Points
    Stephen Curry, 2009. Golden State Warriors. 19 Points

    Five Worst

    Eddie Griffin, 2001. Houston Rockets. 9 Points
    Chris Mihm, 2000. Cleveland Cavaliers. 9 Points
    Charlie Villanueva, 2005. Toronto Raptors. 9 Points
    Lionel Simmons, 1990. Los Angeles Clippers. 10 Points
    Luc Longley, 1991. Minnesota Timberwolves. 10 Points

    This is more of a traditionally spread pick, albeit one without any bonafide superstars. Still, it’s also one without any major, franchise destroying busts. Eddie Griffin comes the closest, but with the problems he dealt with in his tragically short life, it’s hard to really blame this pick on anything to do with basketball. Mihm and Villanueva, though both bad value, put together extended NBA careers.

    The rest: Alvin Robertson, Kirk Hinrich (18), Greg Monroe, Harrison Barnes, Richard Hamilton (16), Roy Tarpley, Jason Williams (15), Damon Stoudamire, George McCloud (14), Lamond Murray, Bobby Hurley, Tim Perry, Bismack Biyombo (13), Eric Gordon, Walt Williams (12), Lorenzen Wright, Tim Thomas, Randy Foye, Corey Brewer (11)


    #8 Pick

    Five Best

    Detlef Schrempf, 1985. Dallas Mavericks. 18 Points
    Kerry Kittles, 1996. New Jersey Nets. 17 Points
    Vin Baker, 1993. Milwaukee Bucks. 15 Points
    Brian Grant, 1994. Sacramento Kings. 15 Points
    Ron Harper, 1986. Cleveland Cavaliers. 15 Points

    Five Worst

    Joe Alexander, 2008. Milwaukee Bucks. 5 Points
    DeSagana Diop, 2001. Cleveland Cavaliers. 6 Points
    Rafael Araujo, 2004. Toronto Raptors. 7 Points
    Shawn Respert, 1995. Milwaukee Bucks. 9 Points
    Lancaster Gordon, 1984. Los Angeles Clippers. 9 Points

    If you thought the #6 pick was bad, then this must be torture. Not a single serious cornerstone to build off of here, with the possible exception of Schrempf, who saw most of his success with a different team. Kerry Kittles was a solid contributor on a back to back Finals team, but he was the 4th starter on that team and the Eastern Conference was abysmal, so he hardly inspires confidence. The bad picks from this spot include two of the worst in the history of the NBA in Diop and Joe Alexander, neither of whom I’m convinced had ever actually played basketball beforehand. In four years, Ben McLemore could be the best #8 pick in the last 30 years, and I wouldn’t bat an eye.

    The rest: Andre Miller, Rudy Gay, Brandon Knight (14), Terrence Ross, Randy White, Olden Polynice, Larry Hughes (13), T.J. Ford, Channing Frye, Rex Chapman (12), Todd Day, Adonal Foyle, Chris Wilcox, Jamal Crawford (11), Jordan Hill, Brandan Wright, Bo Kimble, Al-Farouq Aminu (10), Mark Macon (9)


    #9 Pick

    Five Best

    Dirk Nowitzki, 1998. Dallas Mavericks. 41 Points
    Amar’e Stoudemire, 2002. Phoenix Suns. 23 Points
    Joakim Noah, 2007. Chicago Bulls. 22 Points
    Tracy McGrady, 1996. Toronto Raptors. 21 Points
    Andre Iguodala, 2004. Philadelphia 76ers. 20 Points

    Five Worst

    Ed O’Bannon, 1995. New Jersey Nets. 8 Points
    Patrick O’Bryant, 2006. Golden State Warriors. 8 Points
    Michael Sweetney, 2003. New York Knicks. 9 Points
    Rodney White, 2001. Detroit Pistons. 10 Points
    Eric Montross, 1994. Boston Celtics. 10 Points

    Much more stable and impressive than the last, the 9 spot has seen at least one sure-fire Hall of Famer in Dirk, and a bevy of recent All-Stars in Noah, STAT, T-Mac and Iguodala. On the bust end of things, if your team has a chance to draft someone with a O in front of their name in the 9 spot, run in fear or pray for a trade.

    The rest: Shawn Marion (19), Derrick McKey, Charles Oakley (17), Otis Thorpe, Stacey Augmon (16), Gordon Hayward, Kemba Walker, Andre Drummond (15), DeMar DeRozan, Rony Seikaly (14), Rodney Rogers, Brad Sellers (13), Clarence Weatherspoon, Joel Przybilla (12), Tom Hammonds, D.J. Augustin, Willie Burton (11), Samaki Walker, Ike Diogu (10)


    #10 Pick

    Five Best

    Paul Pierce, 1998. Boston Celtics. 37 Points
    Horace Grant, 1987. Chicago Bulls. 27 Points
    Andrew Bynum, 2005. Los Angeles Lakers. 25 Points
    Joe Johnson, 2001. Boston Celtics. 21 Points
    Eddie Jones, 1994. Los Angeles Lakers. 19 Points

    Five Worst

    Mouhamad Sene, 2006. Seattle SuperSonics. 5 Points
    Luke Jackson, 2004. Cleveland Cavaliers. 8 Points
    Rumeal Robinson, 1990. Atlanta Hawks. 9 Points
    Danny Fortson, 1997. Denver Nuggets. 10 Points
    Ed Pinckney, 1985. Phoenix Suns. 11 Points

    We round out the top 10 with a strong showing from the three winningest franchises in the history of the league. The top three players here combined to win 10 titles for their team, more than justifying their draft selections and absolutely maximizing their value at this particular spot. Paul Pierce is the shining star here, becoming one of the best players in the history of one of the most storied franchises in the history of the sport after being drafted after NINE other players. On the negative side of things, another of the worst picks in history, Mouhamad Sene, meanders his way to the top of the list in a fashion not dissimilar to how he meandered through his uneventful NBA career.

    The rest: Brook Lopez, Paul George (18), Lindsey Hunter (17), Willie Anderson (16), Caron Butler, Brandon Jennings, Kurt Thomas (15), Jason Terry (14), Jimmer Fredette, Erick Dampier (13), Leon Wood, Pooh Richardson, Keyon Dooling, Johnny Dawkins, Adam Keefe, Bison Dele, Jarvis Hayes (12), Austin Rivers, Spencer Hawes, Ed Pinckney (11)


    Best of the Rest

    While the top 10 tends to be where franchises make and take their futures, it’s not the only place to find value. Here’s the rest of the first rounders in David Stern’s tenure whose scores tallied a 20 or above on my super-awesome scale, in descending order.

    Kobe Bryant (64), Tony Parker (49), Karl Malone (44), John Stockton (39), Joe Dumars, Derek Fisher (38), Steve Nash, Reggie Miller, Rajon Rondo (30), Shawn Kemp (27), Robert Horry, Tayshaun Prince, Sam Cassell (25), Peja Stojakovic, Zydrunas Ilgauskas (24), Arvydas Sabonis (22), Terry Porter, Andrei Kirilenko, Danny Granger (21), Tim Hardaway, Vlade Divac, Roy Hibbert, David West, A.C. Green, Kawhi Leonard (20)


    Note: A higher ranking does not make a better player. All it means is that the player in question was more valuable to the team that drafted him than someone with a lower ranking. Case in point: Derek Fisher is one of the worst players above 20 on this list, and he’s got one point less than Kevin Garnett.

    http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/2013...vid-stern-era/
    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: The Best and Worst Draft Picks of the David Stern Era (Hardwood Paroxysm)

    Eddie Jones!
    And where is the center that Portland drafted in front of Jordan?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Best and Worst Draft Picks of the David Stern Era (Hardwood Paroxysm)

      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
      Eddie Jones!
      And where is the center that Portland drafted in front of Jordan?
      Sam Bowie is in the #2 pick section. Where's Len Bias?

      I think this thing ignores the important question of who else was in the draft. Pervis may not have produced as much as a #1 pick should have from the '89 draft, but who else would have? Sean Elliott is the only positive on the list and he wouldn't be there if taken #1. That was just a weak draft...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Best and Worst Draft Picks of the David Stern Era (Hardwood Paroxysm)

        I was a little confused by the thread title. I thought Stern only did trades.
        You Got The Tony!!!!!!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Best and Worst Draft Picks of the David Stern Era (Hardwood Paroxysm)

          Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
          I was a little confused by the thread title. I thought Stern only did trades.
          You sir are not familiar with the bent/frozen envelope theory.



          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Best and Worst Draft Picks of the David Stern Era (Hardwood Paroxysm)

            Originally posted by Grover View Post
            Sam Bowie is in the #2 pick section. Where's Len Bias?
            Yes, but I meant why wasn't he ranked the worst of the #2 picks.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Best and Worst Draft Picks of the David Stern Era (Hardwood Paroxysm)

              Originally posted by Grover View Post
              Where's Len Bias?
              Dwight Howard isn't listed either.


              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
              Yes, but I meant why wasn't he ranked the worst of the #2 picks.
              ...because he was tied for 12th worst (he and Evan Turner had 13 points) by HP's methodology.
              This is the darkest timeline.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The Best and Worst Draft Picks of the David Stern Era (Hardwood Paroxysm)

                Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                ...because he was tied for 12th worst (he and Evan Turner had 13 points) by HP's methodology.
                Head meet wall.

                Comment

                Working...
                X