This is just a thread I wanted to use to vent about the so called analyst, experts and fans every year who definitively make comments about drafts and how strong or weak they are.
There have been many times these analyst, fans and so called experts have made definitive statements about the talent coming out of a draft class and they were proven wrong.
I do not mind analyst, fans or draft experts making a statement that says a draft "looks" to be weak or however they deem the draft to be. However when people make definitive statements like the upcoming draft IS very weak or "whatever other way they feel the draft will be," it would seem they think they are psychic. Psychics do not exist. If they did they would all have all the worlds power and wealth.
Just as many times people get certain player evaluations wrong they do the same thing with many of these draft classes.
While I do not see a draft class that offers up many future stars I do see one that could offer up some depth in the way of average to good performers and contributors. However that is simply my observation. I could be way wrong just as the overall consensus of people could be wrong about this draft.
From my experience it usually takes at least three years to grade an overall draft class. One can surmise what they think a draft class will be like in the future but they can not know for sure.
Blanket statements are sheer ignorance and many times arrogance.
This is a weak draft.
And 911 is a joke!
Bobcats Sunshine Club
SOMEONE will pay for THIS!
i totally agree, by the way. only time will tell how good a draft usually is. and i could give a crap about the talent level as a whole of a draft class. all you need is one player and every draft has at least one or two very strong players.
2012 (still watching): davis, drummond, lillard early candidates
2011 (still watching): irving, and a whole bunch of dudes who might continue to blossom
2010: wall, favors, cousins, monroe, paul george, larry sanders
2009: blake griffin, harden, steph curry, holiday
2008: rose, westbrook, kevin love, brook lopez, perkovic
2007: durant, al horford, joakim noah, marc gasol
no, not all of those guys are "franchise players." but even still, you put a couple of them on the same team and you are looking good. it's really about selecting the right guy and then putting him in an environment to succeed. so i'm not too stressed.
also, it seems like every year they always say the draft is going to be weak, but maybe i'm just imagining it.
I could care less if this was a weak draft anyway. We're drafting around 1-3 range so it'll be really hard for us to screw up our draft pick. We all know that Shabazz Muhammad, Cody Zeller, Ben McLemore & Nerlens Noel will not upset anyone who gets them, & that's not even naming the other prospects that are playing well this year.
Yes, your also correct that they say the draft is going to be weak every year. I don't let analyst's opinions change mine. I agree with more people on this forum than I do with ESPN analyst, most of them have no idea what they are talking about and just base stuff off of player popularity and stuff like that.
For an example..Let's go with a recent fuck-up when nor Shaq or Charles drafted Kemba and he was the 2nd/3rd best player on the board (I think he's better than Lillard).
Oh and another example...Today Stephen A. & Skip said if Mike suited up at 50 years old,(as of this weekend) out of shape and all, that he would average 15 PPG, 7 RBS, & 4 AST. Need I say more?
Last edited by CampNightmare8; 02-12-2013 at 02:45 AM.
The only danger of picking high in a weak draft is ending up with someone like Bargnani. Between McLemore, Muhammad, Noel, Bennett, and hell I'll even throw in Zeller and Smart, I doubt that happens.
No offense but to make blanket statements is indicative of someone thinking they know everything and can tell us what will happen in life. If you do and you can you should be the richest man on earth.
Weak drafts have turned out better than people thought they would be and vice versa.
Far more often than not people are correct but the fact that they sometimes are proven wrong means that blanket statements are for foolish people.
Not to mention even in the instance of strong drafts it usually takes about three years to judge a complete draft class.
If this draft is so weak perhaps only the top five picks should be made. I mean everybody else is deep bench talent and most teams have those spots solidified.
Let the experts determine how deep this draft is and scratch all the drafting of "weak" players unworthy of doing much of anything in the NBA.
You and all the experts can nominate players members of the HOF before they even play a game in the NBA. Since everybody has the answers.
Hook, line and sinker.
It is a weak draft though. That's not a definitive statement, it's a relative one. All you need is a decent eye for basketball talent/ability and experience for reference points to see that this draft doesn't stack up all that well compared to ones like 2003 or 1984.
Last edited by BrotherDave; 02-13-2013 at 11:14 PM.