What's new
By:

2016 NBA Season Notes/Info

Gobert wasn't a risky pick either.. He was actually EXTREMELY,UNBELIEVABLY low risk at the spot he was selected.

He would've beenlow risk had the Jazz stayed pat at 14 and taken him at the bottom of the lottery -- I remember saying I'dbe cool with them taking him at 14.. One of the reasons I'd have cited were his potential to hit 65%-70% FT's
 
PG_AB said:
Gobert wasn't a risky pick either.. He was actually EXTREMELY,UNBELIEVABLY low risk at the spot he was selected.

He would've beenlow risk had the Jazz stayed pat at 14 and taken him at the bottom of the lottery -- I remember saying I'dbe cool with them taking him at 14.. One of the reasons I'd have cited were his potential to hit 65%-70% FT's
Click to expand...

Saint Cy of JFC said:
What? I asked you a question to what would make Gobert considered a risky pick if he was drafted in the mid to late lottery. You responded "Yep thats basically what Im saying". There might be a language barrier here, but Im asking for you to describe to me what exactly would make Gobert be considered a "risky" pick if he was drafted in the mid to late lottery.
Click to expand...

BTP said:
I just went back to read this pre draft writeup. That's the definition of high risk-high reward. The Jazz got lucky everyone including themselves passed on that potential early in the round and then found a stupid team willing to part with their pick and give the Jazz a no risk - high reward guy(Spurs had the 28th pick if you're curious ;) )
Click to expand...

I probably should've said that Gobert's profile is that of a high risk high reward kind of prospect. Since everyone passed on him, he turned into a no risk high reward guy as all the Jazz had to invest were a couple millions and a mid 2nd round pick.
At the time let's say Giannis would've been picked up around 5 and Gobert at 9. Those picks would've been highly discussed, scrutinized. But people would've added: "They got some legit upside. If their games ever catch up to the potential the bodies and personality offers, watch out!"
So yes targeting high reward players is something the Magic IMO missed out on a bit. We seem to have slightly different views on Gordon, Hezonja and Payton, but at least we're on the same page that targeting those guys is a good way to build a roster.
 
BTP said:
I probably should've said that Gobert's profile is that of a high risk high reward kind of prospect. Since everyone passed on him, he turned into a no risk high reward guy as all the Jazz had to invest were a couple millions and a mid 2nd round pick.
At the time let's say Giannis would've been picked up around 5 and Gobert at 9. Those picks would've been highly discussed, scrutinized. But people would've added: "They got some legit upside. If their games ever catch up to the potential the bodies and personality offers, watch out!"
So yes targeting high reward players is something the Magic IMO missed out on a bit. We seem to have slightly different views on Gordon, Hezonja and Payton, but at least we're on the same page that targeting those guys is a good way to build a roster.
Click to expand...

Im just trying to figure out what makes something high risk to you.
 
The Denver Nuggets are working to find a new home for center Jusuf Nurkic in advance of next month's NBA trade deadline, according to league sources.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Im just trying to figure out what makes something high risk to you.
Click to expand...

Investing a very coveted pick/asset to get something that may never pan out. If you invest a #1 pick, it's by definition high risk in most years.
Since the average return on a #1 pick is very high, missing out like Cleveland did with Anthony Bennett is potentially a huge problem. Now if you pair your high value pick with a prospect that's perceived to have a high variance and high ceiling, you create a high risk high reward situation. If you select Victor Oladipo with a #2 pick, you're not going for the highest reward, because the likelihood of Oladipo turning into a franchise player is 1%, while he's a worst case probably going to be a guy who can be the league's best 4th option on a contender with special roster makeup.
 
BTP said:
Investing a very coveted pick/asset to get something that may never pan out. If you invest a #1 pick, it's by definition high risk in most years.
Since the average return on a #1 pick is very high, missing out like Cleveland did with Anthony Bennett is potentially a huge problem. Now if you pair your high value pick with a prospect that's perceived to have a high variance and high ceiling, you create a high risk high reward situation. If you select Victor Oladipo with a #2 pick, you're not going for the highest reward, because the likelihood of Oladipo turning into a franchise player is 1%, while he's a worst case probably going to be a guy who can be the league's best 4th option on a contender with special roster makeup.
Click to expand...

So is that based off your own personal evaluation of a player's perceived floor/ceiling or the general consensus?
 
Chris Mannix offers a pretty good solution for the Carmelo/NY situation:


Carmelo should consider Boston
A meeting of the minds between Knicks president Phil Jackson and Carmelo Anthony eased tensions in New York — for now. But Anthony is in Year Three of a five-year contract, and it’s hard to see how the Knicks can be anything more than a fringe contender the next two seasons. Best-case scenario: The Knicks are able to lure Chris Paul to New York next summer. Worst case: The Knicks continue to strike out with marquee free agents, and ‘Melo finishes his Knicks career with back-to-back lottery trips.

Anthony loves New York, but there is a team nearby that could offer him a coveted chance to compete for a title: Boston. The Celtics have assets (Jae Crowder, Marcus Smart, picks) and could put together a strong offer. Anthony would fill Boston’s void as a wing scorer, and an Anthony-Isaiah Thomas-Al Horford core would be a legitimate threat to Cleveland.

Would Anthony — who has a no-trade clause, as well as a 15 percent trade kicker — be interested? There are no signs yet that he would. But with the Knicks season slipping away, Anthony may have to decide if winning a championship is a priority. Boston offers opportunity. New York does not.
Click to expand...


I think it makes sense. Win-win for both sides. BOS has a boatload of picks they can offer NY. Isiah-Anthony-Horford sounds like a pretty nice trio going forward for BOS. It also gives BOS a star (albeit an old one), and a chance to take Cleveland on (LeBron is ageing too isn't he?).
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
So is that based off your own personal evaluation of a player's perceived floor/ceiling or the general consensus?
Click to expand...

Well in this case I quoted an evaluation of Givony and Mike Schmitz on Rudy 1 month before the draft. They create the best(most accurate, least biased) free available content for fans in my opinion.
But generally I trust what I see on the court. I don't watch all that much youth basketball though, so I rely on player summaries a fair amount.
 
Embiid only played 22 minutes and the Sixers still beat the Blazers. Good lord that team has really collapsed from last year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top