Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2021 12:40:57 GMT -5
3002 Lottery Recap Roundtable
Participants:
Chap
Majic
Heebs
20s
Dirt
JZ1. Kevin McHale goes #1 overall to the Saps. Some of you had access to scouts, and some didn’t. Based on what you’ve seen, what do you think of this pick? Did Sap set himself up for success?
People in this league love their big men, so grabbing a good one with the first pick seems like a good move. It's not like Cleveland can have less success after this pick, ya know? Through back channels I was able to review a number of scouts, including McHale, that helped in my evaluation of the draft. Overall this looks to be a step or two below last years draft class, but still strong at the top. I 100% think that sapular took the best player in the draft and set himself up nicely moving forward. Everyone in this draft class has at least 1 flaw in their game, I think McHale's is the easiest to manage and should get better moving forward. McHale should be a highly efficient scorer and put up big numbers on the Cavs early on. Like the pick and think it was the best that was available. His grades look mediocre for a lotto pick and bad for a 1.1. I didn't have access to his scout, but credible people that did said he will be a monster. Similar comments were made about Sampson and Ellis and they are. I don't think Sap is ready to compete right now, but he is clearly on the right path and with some FA signings should be able to compete for a playoff spot in the Beast. I think sap made the correct pick. McHale is the best combination of a sure thing and someone with the potential to be an all league player in the draft. He will for sure be a good scoring big and someone who can block shots (with enough TC time). And then you factor in improvement from TC and wherever you decide to put the uppies and he should really be a guy to build around. Another consideration could have been for JBC with his high potential and going to longer, developmental route. But that is a riskier pick and it's possible he kind of fizzles out and you aren't left with much value out of your 1.1 pick. The other options at the top would have been a wing like Toney or Kiki, but I think McHale is the clear choice for a team like sap's ahead of those guys. I personally had McHale #1 on my board. I think McHale has the best scoring grades to date when it comes to rookies. He is a prospect with shinny cats but the athletic volume categories are lacking. The good news is he's nearly capped and you can use your camp and the improvement upgrades on stats you think is important. This is where McHale gets interesting. Is Sap going to boost his strength for usage purposes or is he going to try and boost other defensive or rebounding categories. When you look at his scout i think he's a solid player and we will see what a "non-athletic" big can do in 6.0. I had no reason to scout Kevin McHale because he was gone, but Kevin McHale seems like he will probably be a good pick. His rebounding is obviously his weakness, but that will hopefully solidify itself over time.2. Toney, Kiki, and Brooks all went in the top 5. Do you think any of these players were overdrafted? Would you have had them in the same order that they went?
I was all on board with Brooks and Toney at first glance. I was personally not looking at Kiki in depth. In retrospect that seems like an oversight; he will probably be an excellent scorer. None of these guys were overdrafted. I had had Brooks over Kiki but that would have been a mistake; I didn't pay quite as much attention because I was picking a bit later. I personally thought Kiki looked like the second best player in the draft. That could also be because of the fact that I badly need a SF and was more invested in looking them over, but I still think he is. Him falling to 4 was a bit surprising but I do think Toney looks like a really good player. His scoring on the wing looks elite and he should offer high volume scoring and shouldnt be a slouch on the defensive end. I dont think you could have gone wrong with either of those 2 guys, and again Woodson offers alot of great things assuming his scoring comes around. Without scouts these three are all personal preference on where you want your players to start. Toney has great scoring grades for a SG and no real holes. That C rebounding is nice. But he is a SG in the software, which is a little bit of a downside from a TC/cap perspective. Kiki's defense is a little underwhelming, but defense grades are overrated. He is a SG eligible SF with good starting inside grades. I don't know what his potential is, but hopefully with some work on his inside he'll be great. Brooks is similar, but with a better starting inside grade and that B rebounding at SG is ... whew boy! I'm all hot and bothered. Strictly according to my rankings, Toney and Brooks were overdrafted, but I wouldn't say that they were myself. I had Toney 3 instead of 2, we are splitting hairs. I had Kiki at #2 and was very happy to land him at 4, I believe he was the best fit for my team. Brooks is a very strong player and should end up as a great wing, I just preferred Kiki and then I had a couple of high potential guys in my rankings ahead of Brooks. The order I had these three players in was Kiki, Toney, Brooks. I had all three of these prospects in the top 5 of my big board. Toney is a intriguing prospect with a scoring cat already capped. If he can keep growing through that cap he might be on the same level as Kiki. It will be interesting what upgrades he will receive but watching what Ward did with Byron it should be pretty obvious after pre-season. I think i would have taken him with the 5th pick because his inside will be capped his entire career. Kiki will come out of this draft with the best scoring grades after improvements. The one reason why i pick KiKi three here is because all of these prospects are bad on defense. It's pretty obvious I would go with the elite scorer over the other two. Last but not least Brooks was the right choice at five. He has no 3pt shooting but has tremendous rebounding ability and solid strength, he looks to have the look of a good player in the league. He should be an above average scorer and even after upgrades i don't see him being an all-star in his career. Based on the profiles and grades I think I would rather have Kiki and Toney, primarily because of the rebounding. I also prefer SF’s to SGs because of the inside cap. However, both look like they will be solid players.3. We had a trade into the top 5 for Michael Brooks giving up 1.7 and 1.9 in next year’s draft. What do you think about this deal? Does Michael Brooks seem worth it?
Maybe an overpay? If it is, I don't think it's egregious. I offered dirt less value than this and he didn't accept so it is what it is. Brooks should be a beast. SF seems like a position that could be hard to find good players at, even though this draft had three good SF. JZ was a man with a plan. Brooks is a very intriguing prospect and it will be interesting to see what his new GM focuses on. There is alot to like about him and ultimately his biggest flaw is his scoring. Obviously you can help with the upgrades but it will be important for the Nets to choose wisely on what the upgrade. I don't expect much growth from him in TC so he looks to be an immediate contributor after getting his +30. The overall value is questionable but if he can turn into an efficient scorer he will be a complete player. giving up 2 "lottery" picks seems like alot but we shall see how he turns out. Oh, I get this now. We're all taking turns sucking BK's dick. 20s, I've got this question - why don't you tickle his balls or something? Brooks is a legit looking SG eligible SF. His rebounding is beyond elite for a SG out of the gate. You can pump his inside and then drop everything else into jump shot and you've got a 21 year old Drazen Dalipagic with elite rebounding. He's an awesome looking prospect. I don't know if 1.7 and 1.9 will be worth it, but next season it will be for sure. Michael Brooks is a good player. Brooks will be a great rebounder and with upgrades, should be a really good scorer. His potential likely limits how good he can become, but he should be a nice, high level player on a good team. I doubt he will ever be a championship team's #1 guy, but that is a pretty high standard. Brooks is probably like Rodney McCray without the assists. I personally think that 1.7 and 1.9 are better value than 1.5, but if you really like a guy, go for it. I did like the return that dirt got for 1.5, especially since he traded back into the draft and landed Wes Matthews Sr. at 8, the guy I personally would have selected at 5. I was apart of this trade so i can bring some insight on why I did what I did. I liked Brooks scoring grades but I'm tired of watching Drazen get dusted every night on the defensive end of the floor. Brooks' defensive categories aren't good and i don't think he will improve with his potential. I do think he's worthy of a top 5 pick so i decided to trade it after eyeing another prospect. I had Mathews as the sixth best prospect on my board and was hoping he could fall to me at 1.8. My window is closed after this season so i didn't want a C Potential in this draft. I know Mathews isn't polished in some categories and I'm hoping with the right TC he can become an above average PG. With all that said i think Brooks is worth the 1.7 and 1.9 because i don't think you'll find a good scoring wing at those draft positions. If these two draft classes tell me anything it's you can find a polished big later in drafts but it will be more difficult to find a wing as polished in scoring as Brooks is. The name of the game is Rebound Simulation, and Brooks is going to win that for me in spades. I expect this guy to come in and be a DD like player for my team. This first season or two he will have to shoulder a lot of the scoring load, which may impact his efficiency, but once he’s the 3rd best player on my team, I expect him to shine in that role.4. What do you think about the talent level in this draft compared to last season’s draft? We saw many rookies come into the league and immediately be top player’s at their respective positions, is the trend continuing or did eric tone it down?
I would be very surprised if this years rookies do just as well as last years, but I don't really have evidence to support that opinion. I hope that these rookies are just as good, and for that trend to continue. I stated it in question 1 but the overall top of this draft seems to be a step or two below last years draft. In my opinion there are likely 3-4 players from last years class that would have been drafted before the first player in this draft. With that said I don't think this is a bad class, just built a little differently. It seems most guys have more "flaws" in comparison to last years draft class but I don't expect it to have a huge impact. I don't know if any of these guys end up having the impact that Drexler, Sampson, Ellis and Carr have immediately but I could this class having a huge impact down the line. I've not seen the scouts for this class or any of the players play. It looks like there will be a few immediate impact players, just like last draft. I trust eric knows what he is doing with the draft classes and am not going to freak out about anything until we see how players like Ellis and Sampson look at 32. Hopefully those lower potential instant stars won't dominate the league their entire careers. I liked last year's draft a little better than this year's, but I think the difference is being overblown a little bit league wide. You are going to see guys like McHale, Kiki, Brooks, Matthews, and Gminski come in and contribute immediately. You are going to have JBC likely blossom into a fantastic big. There are depth pieces scattered throughout the top 15 who will be solid contributors.Also, I will disagree with your comment that we saw "many rookies come into the league and immediately be top player's [sic] at their respective positions". Who did that? Sampson, maybe? I'd probably still take Moala over him. Carr, maybe? I'd probably take Sharrar over him. Drexler is maybe your best bet as a guy who could be considered the best SG already. Ellis is close, but not the best at his position. Anyway, I think you had 4 rookies come in and perform among the top guys at their position, I think it is questionable if any of them are already the best at their spot.
I don't think eric toned it down, I think he continued doing what he is doing. And that is what I think he should keep on doing. Read the profiles, build the guys how he sees fit, run the test sims, tweak. Big fan eric, keep going. But tone down all the classes where BK has a top pick.
As i said on the A+ Mock Draft Podcast, I think this was a fair and balanced draft class. I think the 02 class is something we will see more of instead of 01. I don't think that's a bad thing at all. You have a few high potential guys that can grow throughout their rookie years, you have your polished B and C Potential guys that can come in quick and be a valuable asset for a title contending team. I have some comparisons i can give but i will put that in my FBB Test Sim Article for the 02 Rookies. I will just say you have your top players with great scoring grades and you have your guys that need a little improvement love. I think some GMs will be surprised at how good this class is. There are players with elite categories on one end or the other. It seems like these rookies won’t be as good. I guess we will see. The Nets will be an interesting case study, barring FA luck, as we will be trotting out our three rookies as the top 3 scoring options. Will it mirror the early success of Bankz team (before his trades focused on contention)? I doubt it, but am hopeful.5. For those of you who had top picks, were you considering trading down? Were you disappointed with the top talent in this draft? For those of you who had later picks, were you considering trading up? How do you feel about the depth of this class?
I liked the depth of this class and did not try very hard to trade up. I mentioned that I very quickly threw out and offer to dirt, but even when I did, it seemed below the return he was looking for. Once Brooks was taken, I knew I would get one of Griffith or Smith; I was happy with that. It turns out I had the choice of those two. We'll see if I made the correct one (I did, I'm going dunk on you fools). I had a pick at 1.13, I really like O'Koren and thought he could fall to my slot. I did explore trying to trade up a few picks to get him but I was never considering moving up much higher than 1.9 or 1.8. I think there is depth in this class as I think there are 8-10 guys that all seem to have similar value. When compared to last years class I don't think have the same talent level, but there does seem to be decent depth when compared to each other. I don't think eric was influenced by anything, I just think he built this class a little differently as it doesnt look like its as strong of a class overall. As we did in 5.0 I expect to see there to be a nuance to how each class is built as eric reviews the profiles. The depth seems pretty good. I never considered trading up because I want to trade out of the first round to save cap space. I had pick 4 and I never considered trading down, really. I wanted to land the top talent that I could get my hands on. I tried trading up to 1.2 and 1.3 to secure Kiki, but wasn't able to get a deal done and ended up getting him at 4. I was not disappointed with the top talent in this draft at all, I was very happy to land what should be an elite scoring wing and improve the biggest weakness on my current roster. The depth seems good, maybe not quite as good as last year. It's hard for me to speak to the non-profile players as I don't have their scouts, but I would say this draft has 7 for sure big time players, and then another 7-8 guys who will for sure be positive contributors/role players but not on the level of an all league guy. After that, who knows. But that seems like a solid class to me. I feel good about the depth and that's the main reason i moved down. I have a good feeling on Mathews but it is a little bit of a risky move. His handles are weak and that's concerning but I'm in love with his scoring abilities. You have some explosive athletes with weak scoring and some great scorers with weaknesses. I also see some bigs that are good and with some improvements can be very solid. There were some prospects i shook my head at but that will probably happen more and more. I think Roland being an IRL All-Star and getting the ugly stick shouldn't happen. I wasn't disappointed with the talent because i can see some players jumping right into the league with a bang. I don’t know if there’s an Antoine Carr, Clyde Drexler, or Dale Ellis in this class. I find that a little disappointing. Of course our rookie classes get made in such a way that someone going off of 0 knowledge (meaning we had no idea how good the initial rookies would look) gets incredibly lucky and gets a bunch of HOFers right off the bat, while the people that tried to adjust to that reality get gut-punched with a stark pullback in talent. 6. Now that everyone has had a taste of the early draft system, what do you think of it? Do you feel like starting the draft early is a good or bad thing?
I liked drafting early but maybe that is just because that is what my current team needs, picks and FAs. Generally speaking, this league moves pretty fast. Will this speed up the offseason? I still haven't figured out exactly what that timing looks like. Its the same as we did in 5.0 and I tend to like it. I remember hating it when we initially rolled it out back in 5.0 but I cam to enjoy the efficiency of getting it done so quickly. The current setup also allows for better, more targeted scouting for GM's without a top pick, and I think that's a positive. I dont see a reason to change the process as it sits and think it does a great job moving things along. I like it. It seems efficient and gives us something to discuss post trade deadline. It's a great thing. Allows people to pick at their own pace, makes the end of the season more exciting as there is sims and extra action with the draft, and allows for the offseason to move quicker as well. I was always in favor of being able to draft early, it is a great benefit of the wheel since we already know the draft order. I am still in favor from someone being able to wait and use their time if they are up in the draft and the clock hasn't started yet. I'd rather they pick, but it's their prerogative. I think you should pick whenever you want to pick. If i didn't trade out of 1.5 i might have waited until the trade deadline but i made offers, made some moves and did my thing. I like the draft starts early but I don't think people should get butt hurt if a GM decides to wait regardless of the reason why. Early drafting is obviously the creme of the crop. There’s nothing better for driving online activity in the second half of the season among the ⅘s of the league that have no chance at a title.7. How about scouting. Some of you are veterans of scouting in 5.0, while to some of you it is new. Do you generally like the system, or are you against scouting, and why?
The stats scouting seems a little weird because we don't know what settings eric uses when he runs the sim (what team the player is on, what offense, if they're a scoring option, etc.). This is probably intentional though. Depending on how my free agency goes, I'm going to hire a scouting assistant for next year and get in on a(dirt's?) scouting group. I love scouting and think its an extremely important feature to have when we are utilizing wheel. It gives the GM all the information they need to make the best pick possible, which is extremely important to staying competitive in wheel. With a normal lottery system, if you miss on a pick you are right back in the lottery the next year to try again, no big deal. With wheel, if you miss a pick it can have a lasting impact as its several years before you will have another top 5 pick. Overall I like the scouting system and hope we continue it as is. I've not scouted anyone yet because I had 1.1 and knew I was drafting Clyde and then I knew I wanted to trade out of this draft. I always like perfect information so I have very positive views on scouting. When I have picks worth scouting, I will be looking to scout. I get why some GMs don't like it, though. It does take a lot of the gamble out of drafting because you know what you're picking. I personally like that and think you can have your gambling via TC as the player grows. Scouting system is nice, gets a ton of info, I feel like you basically have to do it now if you have a top pick. With the big group scouts happening, it's a little silly but it is still costing everyone some skrouse coin. I have paid 33k each of the first two drafts to get 14 and 17 full scouts, respectively. Anyway, I don't have a strong opinion on if I like scouting or not, but I know that with the current system in place, I'm always going to be using it if I have a top pick. As the self proclaimed draft guru I LOVE the scouts. I'm sure I've frustrated some GMs with my articles and testing but I enjoy it. I totally bought into the scouts and I think we are way to far in to change it. Even with the scouts being out there you still have difficult decisions to make on your rookies. I have the software and the builds and I was still torn on who to take at 1.5. You really don't know how a guy is going to perform in this type of league. Of course when McHale is there or another top prospect is there you take them. For Example, Sampson and Ellis last season, It really depends on what position you want and who is going to be better and who has the better potential. There are multiple ways to look at prospects, you can see what your shopping for but your still unsure if you want a tank top or a t-shirt. I’d prefer we went back to no scouting, or “stat grades” like what we had in creation. Full scouting rookies makes the game too easy. We aren’t supposed to be trying to make this easier.8. Setting aside your like/dislike of scouting in general, I want to ask a question about how we have it set up. How do you feel about some of the nuances of our scouting system, such as PM’d trades, scouting “groups”, cost, time extent, etc.?
It seems like it works ok. Maybe a little expensive? No real basketball team would not scout before a draft. Maybe the stats could just be more in depth. If the prospect played multiple years in college, you get stats for each year. That's just the first thing that popped into my head. Overall I think the system is working now that we have sorted out the kinks from last draft. The biggest enhancement from 5.0 has been the increase in "group" scouting. Its honestly an awesome way to get alot of information and not have it cost an insane amount of money. Given the increase in group scouting I actually think the cost of full scouts is right where it should be. Most times GM's will be spending 30-40k and will get access to information necessary to make the best pick. That seems fair value and again I hope we leave it all where its at. The groups have the potential to be a little toxic for GMs with early picks that are not invited to those groups. It would suck to have a top 5 pick, not be invited, and be picking against other GMs with perfect information on 16 players (for the price of 4) while you're trying to scout a few on your own dime. That said, I think scout sharing will happen anyways and it's good to see scouting networks being set up more formally. I have no complaints about the cost. If anything, it may be a little cheap for how powerful it is. I don't really have much to add here that I didn't say above. The idea of paying money to scout a player and get added information is cool. It is somewhat hard to implement since once someone has that info, they are free to share it with anyone else. We have friends in this league, we have a few cliques, and we have official scouting groups as well so the info is being shared frequently. The scouting groups are just a way for the GMs to share costs and do it in an official manner so everyone is getting the scouting info directly from eric. I have spent over 50K in each of the drafts and the money was well worth it. I think the draft group is the way to go honestly. I probably give out info i shouldn't but i try not to just send people full scouts unless i can get a trade or something like that. I've spent money on Grade Scouts, I've spend money on Stat Scouts and Number Scouts. All three are a good way to pick the right guy. The most important thing about a draft is picking the right guy at your position. Sometimes it's BPA sometimes it's when you need a big man. This season i purchased stat scouts on Brooks and Mathews because i was torn on what to do. Those Scouts helped me make the decision and that's why the options are there. I wouldn't change a thing honestly. These scouts really makes you deep dive into these guys and most of the time there is no clear cut prospect. Even last season Drexler and Ellis, there was no obvious choice. When your sitting at 1.7 or 1.8 there is no obvious choice. Will i take Bol the defensive guy, Will i take Stip the offensive guy. There is always options in the draft and these scouts Eric gives us helps our franchises more than anything. Group scouting seems awful and like it intentionally evades the cost of scouting. No skill is required to make your scouts much cheaper than they are for everyone else, except for being a part of the good ol boys club. Join the Chapnets 3003 scouting organization! Also getting rid of people being able to just include scouting information in regular trades sucks.9. Any thoughts on any of the picks outside the top few? Any guys at the back end of the top 10 you thought should’ve been in the top 5? Any guys outside the top 10 you think are going to end up being really nice players?
I like JZ's draft. Two wings and Larry Smith seems like a nice haul. Wes Matthews was a nice pick right after me. TBH, I haven't looked at players lower in the draft yet; eventually I need to get around to that for my second round picks. In my opinion the players from picks 4-12 all seemed to have the same relative value when compared to each other. Each of them has a couple strengths mixed with a couple flaws, but overall very similar. Mentioned above but I really liked O'Koren for where he was drafted, I also like the value on Mike Woodson. Both have the potential to become high level players. The biggest question mark for me was probably Joe Barry Carroll going at 1.3. He has all the potential in the world to become a stud but its always risky leaving things up to TC. I would have personally liked Kik ahead of him and even Brooks, but the allure of potential can entice any GM. Other than those I think the draft went as expected. I really liked Ward's pick of Kelvin Ransey and Bankz's pick of Wes Matthews Sr. Bankz's pick was even better because it came right after his nemesis, TimPig, picked a dud in baba Bouie. I really liked the Wes Matthews Sr. pick by dirt at 1.8. I had Matthews ranked 5th on my big board and was a guy I was going to even consider at 4 if Kiki went off the board at 3. Dirt will put upgrades into him the right way and he should be a very good scoring PG. He isn't gonna be a rebounder or great defender, but if those are his biggest flaws, that's still a good player.I also thought both Kelvin Ransey and Larry Drew fell too far to where they ended up being great value picks for Ward and bankz at 1.16 and 1.18. I like Ransey more than Drew, but Drew should give the 76ers a nice backup PG and an insurance option in case he loses Gardner.
I think the top 5 was expected and they went when they were supposed to. I think Larry Smith and Rick Mahorn are very intriguing prospects. They have elite cats and a +37 into something can really help them. Gminski is another big that will help a team down the road more than what some would think. Once you get over the Visual grades you will start to realize these prospects can help a team just a year or two after drafting them. There are some Hidden Gems going later in this draft that can really shake things up. I’m actually not a fan of the Wes Matthews pick. Dirt is the Draft Guru though and can afford to wait for a couple lucky TCs, but I wouldn’t have touched him until after 1.10.10. Did you make any picks in this draft already? What stood out to you about this player that made you select them?
Easy answer, I already said it. I. AM. GOING. TO. DUNK. ON. FOOLS I selected Mike Woodson with pick 1.13. I mentioned it above but I really like the value for him here at this spot. He looks built to score, and do it efficiently, and that is most important in this league right now. I was looking for a wing in this draft and I am happy to have a guy like Woodson fall to me at 1.13. He has some flaws but I think its manageable when compared to the current makeup of my team. N/A I picked Kiki Vandeweghe at 1.4. He is going to be an elite scoring wing. I had a big hole on my current team on the wing and he will fill that void perfectly. Kiki is also SG eligible at 6'8 which is a nice bonus. I am really excited about the pick and ready to add him to my lineup next year. He will also allow Jon Diebler to go back to SG which is his natural position, he has been playing out of position at SF for me all season long. I think Wes Mathews Sr. is the best PG prospect in 6.0. He will struggle his rookie year but i think he can be a player year two or three. By far the best scoring grades I've seen in a PG but handles are low. I think I'm going to cap his inside year 1 and wait on the rest after a couple TCs to see where his handles are. He has the potential to have A outside scoring if i can get his handles to grow naturally. Depending on Mahorn's TC he can be a 90 Inside 85 Strength Guy and went 1.11. I think he's capable to compete with McHale or KiKi for rookie of the year. It will depend if I sell off and he becomes a top two scoring option for me. Mahorns stat scout he was a 19 and 12 guy with shitty P/TSA. I'm hoping putting +30 into inside will help that. King and Mahorn starting PF/C for 2,466,000 instead of maxing a guy like Pope seems like the smarter move. I’ve made three top picks in this draft. I’ve already discussed Brooks. Larry Smith stands out to me in the same way, great rebounding. I was really torn at 10 between taking Larry Smith, who seemed to me to be the BPA, and ditching my plan to run an outside offense with Cross and Grady as my no-shoot bigs. In the end, I was able to talk to Tyler and grab Larry Smith and the other guy I wanted, O’Koren, to solidify my wings for years to come (h/t future pick Kevin Durant).
