What's new
By:

Drafting Strategy Going Forward

H

homeytennis

Well-Known Member
One of the things that has me curious is the Jazz and the overall NBA's strategy of picking 1 and dones early in the draft. The saga of Trey Lyles this year got me to thinking. Paul Millsap had three years in college and learned to play basketball. I'm not sure the one and dones and learned that yet. It just seems that perhaps a more mature player should be taken with a first round draft pick. The kid that is the rumored top selection played on a team that lost 13 games in a row and got the coach fired. It this really the best player out there? He may be the next Kobe or Lebron but good luck on having him finish NBA games.
 
It's so hard to say. Got to be a combination of athleticism, skill, and work ethic. But knowing how to assess and rank the categories is super tough.
 
As long as they bring some toughness, attitude (the Laimbeer kind not the Cousins kind), energy and the occasional three, I'm happy.
 
infection said:
As long as they bring some toughness, attitude (the Laimbeer kind not the Cousins kind), energy and the occasional three, I'm happy.
Click to expand...

Lambeer played four years in college. He was drafted in the 3rd round back when the draft was 10 rounds. Mark Eaton was drafted in the fifth round and Magic Johnson was No. 1 that year in a pick originally owned by the Jazz. So basically Bill and Mark would have been undrafted free agents today.
 
Our drafting strategy should just be to pick in the 20s, because that's where we're having the most success as of late. The Top 10 should be avoided at all costs.
 
Every draft is different, but generally pick the best available that you have done extensive scouting on, and have a good feeling about.

You pick the best player available, and you take into account probable development, while keeping in mind the time to develop, and the future cost of the player. A good 4 yr college player may be a bargain, as you get to keep them for the entire rookie contract while getting productive minutes. A playoff team may want to sway this route to shore up deficiencies with a near immediate impact.

A high risk project player with tons of upside can be a good pick, but you have to go in knowing that it will take multiple seasons to develop, and IF the dividends pay off by the player reaching a good portion of their potential, you will have to pay them a ton of $$$, which means you may lose them right when they start paying dividends. If you are a lottery team, this is the route you go, as you will get future lottery picks while the player develops and hopefully get a diamond in the rough.

What I don't like, is picking a player that the team has done very little research on because they fall down the draft board. This seems to happen to the Jazz a ton, and they bite on busts (Borchardt, Podkolzin, Brewer, all come to mind).
 
JAZZGASM said:
Every draft is different, but generally pick the best available that you have done extensive scouting on, and have a good feeling about.

You pick the best player available, and you take into account probable development, while keeping in mind the time to develop, and the future cost of the player. A good 4 yr college player may be a bargain, as you get to keep them for the entire rookie contract while getting productive minutes. A playoff team may want to sway this route to shore up deficiencies with a near immediate impact.

A high risk project player with tons of upside can be a good pick, but you have to go in knowing that it will take multiple seasons to develop, and IF the dividends pay off by the player reaching a good portion of their potential, you will have to pay them a ton of $$$, which means you may lose them right when they start paying dividends. If you are a lottery team, this is the route you go, as you will get future lottery picks while the player develops and hopefully get a diamond in the rough.

What I don't like, is picking a player that the team has done very little research on because they fall down the draft board. This seems to happen to the Jazz a ton, and they bite on busts (Borchardt, Podkolzin, Brewer, all come to mind).
Click to expand...

Don't forget Morris Almond and Luther Wright.
 
JAZZGASM said:
Every draft is different, but generally pick the best available that you have done extensive scouting on, and have a good feeling about.

You pick the best player available, and you take into account probable development, while keeping in mind the time to develop, and the future cost of the player. A good 4 yr college player may be a bargain, as you get to keep them for the entire rookie contract while getting productive minutes. A playoff team may want to sway this route to shore up deficiencies with a near immediate impact.

A high risk project player with tons of upside can be a good pick, but you have to go in knowing that it will take multiple seasons to develop, and IF the dividends pay off by the player reaching a good portion of their potential, you will have to pay them a ton of $$$, which means you may lose them right when they start paying dividends. If you are a lottery team, this is the route you go, as you will get future lottery picks while the player develops and hopefully get a diamond in the rough.

What I don't like, is picking a player that the team has done very little research on because they fall down the draft board. This seems to happen to the Jazz a ton, and they bite on busts (Borchardt, Podkolzin, Brewer, all come to mind).
Click to expand...

Eh, Borchardt was a good risk. Only Tayshawn Prince and Boozer amounted to anything after him. If he had stayed healthy he would have been amazing. We immediately traded Podkolzin (he was drafted for Dallas.) That Dallas pick was then traded to move up and get D. Williams the next year. It worked out pretty well. Brewer had an 8 year NBA career which is probably well ahead of the curve for being drafted at #14.
 
The real answer is that you maneuver for extra picks so you can grab solid (and cheap) role players (like Hood) and then use an extra pick on somebody with untapped potential. Don't forget that Rudy was a "potential" pick that we found a way to grab because he was falling. That worked out pretty well for us.
 
You take the best player available unless there is similar talent that fits the current or future roster construction best.

That said I would prioritize length... position versatility... and two way ability when looking at guys. I don't want guys that disrupt what you are trying to do on one side of the floor or the other if possible.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
You take the best player available unless there is similar talent that fits the current or future roster construction best.

That said I would prioritize length... position versatility... and two way ability when looking at guys. I don't want guys that disrupt what you are trying to do on one side of the floor or the other if possible.
Click to expand...

You forgot balance. . .
 
New Jazz draft strategy?

Every Jazz draft evaluation should start with this question "How does this guy make Rudy Gobert better?"

Then drill down to the specifics: Will this guy make better passes to Rudy? Will this guy hit open shots when Rudy throws him the ball? Will this guy set a pick for Rudy? Will this guy box out the opponent so Rudy can get more rebounds?
 
mellow said:
New Jazz draft strategy?

Every Jazz draft evaluation should start with this question "How does this guy make Rudy Gobert better?"

Then drill down to the specifics: Will this guy make better passes to Rudy? Will this guy hit open shots when Rudy throws him the ball? Will this guy set a pick for Rudy? Will this guy box out the opponent so Rudy can get more rebounds?
Click to expand...

I just had a thought given the Jazz flirtation with the CSKA point guard. Say the Jazz have four spots open during the year. Why not go after guys that have made all European league the previous year for those guys? It seems like the Euro players at times play without ego see Manu Ginoblli, Dirk, the Gasols.
 
homeytennis said:
I just had a thought given the Jazz flirtation with the CSKA point guard. Say the Jazz have four spots open during the year. Why not go after guys that have made all European league the previous year for those guys? It seems like the Euro players at times play without ego see Manu Ginoblli, Dirk, the Gasols.
Click to expand...

In some cases their games don't translate well to the NBA (e.g: Šarūnas Jasikevičius)
 
homeytennis said:
One of the things that has me curious is the Jazz and the overall NBA's strategy of picking 1 and dones early in the draft. The saga of Trey Lyles this year got me to thinking. Paul Millsap had three years in college and learned to play basketball. I'm not sure the one and dones and learned that yet. It just seems that perhaps a more mature player should be taken with a first round draft pick. The kid that is the rumored top selection played on a team that lost 13 games in a row and got the coach fired. It this really the best player out there? He may be the next Kobe or Lebron but good luck on having him finish NBA games.
Click to expand...

The flaw in your logic is the guy drafted right after Lyles was also a one and done. I would also say that U can't count Lyles as a bust just yet. I think we need to consider the fact that he played more as a rookie, as the jazz had way more depth this year, and he had a shorter leash. Let's see how he rebounds this next year.
 
Last night Coby Karl was on Sports Talk Radio here. Coby is a DLeague head coach with the LA Defenders and he said there is a certain lack of maturity that is driving NBA coach's crazy. He did say that it would take someone to utilize a high draft pick on say a 3 or 4 year player and have that guy be a star to get the current mindset off length and athleticism. It was an interesting interview and the archive is on the KTIK website if anyone wants to listen to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top