They even built a logo for it, perfectly reminiscent of 1993.
But not only did they draft the teams, they had Strat-O-Matic simulate the teams performance over an 82-game season. My observations:
Since the player pool is infinitely deep, they really should have done a man's league: 16, 20, or even 30 teams would have been better. This would have really put a focus on who did the best drafting. As it stands, I suppose, it's more focused on the players--that is, who are the top 50 franchise players to build around. After 50, you end up getting Paul Pierce and Manu Ginobili, in other words, meh.
Now as to the player selection. Everyone is going to have a team of good players. Which actually informs the selection process. You don't just need players who play well. You need players that play well against the best players.
For example, to pick someone at random, Charles Barkley is a great player. Can dominate most of his contemporaries. But how will he be facing off against the best of the best? In this draft, you need players that proved they could win championships, but specifically against other elite players/teams. Magic and Bird, I think both proved this against each other. Russell with his eleven championships during Wilt's era.
Also, because every player in the draft is excellent, my theory is that it is truly the elite of the elite that matter the most. The question is the elite of the elite cutoff at the top 10, 20, 30 or 40?
Let's start with a case study of the winner: Posnaski.
He drafted #2 Wilt, #19 Dr. J, #22 Isiah, #39 Havlicek, #42 Dirk.
I think Dirk is a quality pick, but after looking at the box scores, he played about 20-25 minutes a game--not a key full-time starter. While Posnaski's picks 2-4 are solid, it seems the differentiator here really was Wilt.
Next up, the second place team: Ballard.
#3 Russell, #18 LeBron, #23 Barkley, #38 Miller, #43 Rodman.
I'm a big Reggie Miller fan, but he's really a 3-point shooter, which there are plenty of other good ones available. It's his top 3 picks that really stand out, and personally, I think that Russell and LeBron are what made his team so successful. Because, and this is key, there aren't other players like them. For Russell, it's just Wilt. For LeBron on paper, you can say Kobe and MJ.
Now let's look at the worst two teams. First: McCallum.
#5 Oscar, #16 Elgin, #25 Pippen.
I can just stop here. I may not really know about the legendary play of Oscar and Elgin, but...
You might pick Oscar by saying that at his position, he's an elite talent. But this draft has proved that's not good enough. It's about finding the few players in the entire history that separate from everyone else, position excluded. In other words, it's easier to find players with Oscar's skills later in the draft, than it is to find one with Wilt's or Russel's.
Let's look at the second worst team: Mannix.
#9 Kobe, #12 Stockton.
That's enough. If you look at the top two drafted teams, they were able to get a great guard-like scorer with their second pick (Dr. J and LeBron). [Two things here: At least on paper in a vacuum, I think LeBron's better than Kobe. Bryant may have the rings, but he also had Phil Jackson and Shaq in his prime. Also, I know LeBron's a small forward, but I use guard-like to differentiate him from the big men.] Stockton is a great passer, but you can get that kind of value later on. It seems like Kobe could have been a second-rounder, Stockton a fourth-rounder, and it makes sense that teams that got a Wilt or Russell in the first round had a clear advantage over a team like this.
- - -
So if we just take a look at the first round picks, in order of finishes:
#2 Wilt
#3 Russell
#1 Jordan
#6 Shaq
#10 Duncan/Hakeem (at 11)
#4 Kareem
#8 Magic
#7 Bird
#9 Kobe
#5 Oscar
When you look at this way, it seems clear that there was an advantage to picking early. That the biggest factor was getting a #1 player that you couldn't get anywhere else. As you might imagine, this favors the elite big men, as they are the hardest to come by. That Jordan can make such a big difference as a two-guard is a testament to how good he really is.
No comments:
Post a Comment