Could we do over 2004 & 05 Drafts?

by Ustation on Jun 16, 2010 10:25 AM EDT

I used to play this game a lot of the Leafs during the 80s, but now I guess we get the unfortunate oppotunity to play this game with the Raps.

What's probably disapointed me the most during the BC era, is the lack of drafts that we've had. Rap fans have been paying a heavy price for the previous era's lack of draft picking skills. Let's see.. during the Babcock era of 2004&05 these were our picks.

2004: Rafael Araujo, Albert Miralles

and even worse in 2005 with 4 picks: Charlie Villaneuva, Joey Graham, Roko Ukic, Uros Slokar.

I remember being at the season ticket holder fan party during the 04 draft. We collectively booed the heck out of Chuck Swisrky when he tried to give some reasonable explanation for Babcocks decision, and we all felt badly for the news bearer, as he seemed equally shocked.

In some defence to Babcock, these were fairly poor draft years, but none the less 5 years later, it's a big swing and a miss. Even if the Raps hit it big, they're probably just slightly above average type of team.

Obviously in 04 we missed out on Andre Iguodala but there was also Biedrins, Jameer Nelson, Varejao and Al Jefferson after. The late 2nd round steal would have been Trevor Ariza.

In 05 was where we needed to make an impact with the four picks: The biggest miss was taking Joey over the much anticipated selection of Danny Granger. I remember getting ready to mouth the words Danny as the commish said Joey. By that time, I knew I was giving up my season tickets. The other misses we could have had was Bynum, David Lee in the first round.

As a team whose never converted a 2nd round pick into a player in it's history, this would have been a tough year to find anyone as Ryan Gomes, Andray Blatche and Amir Johnson were the only serviceable picks that year after Roko.

None the less, what could this team have been like if they hit it big and say picked Iguodala, Ariza, Granger, Lee, and Blatche? More importantly, we mostly likely wouldn't have landed the #1 pick in 06 and say lucked out to draft 6th and say we picked Brandon Roy instead?

Even if we didn't land Roy, a line up of Lee in the middle, Bosh PF, Granger SF, Iggy SG and Jose as PG doesn't sound half bad.

I know I'm bending time here.. but I'd still like to have a do over.

Tweet Comment 6 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

And I tell you what, Granger, Iggy and Lee probably would have been happier too than stuck on their respective teams.

by Ustation on Jun 16, 2010 2:57 PM EDT reply actions

Doing it all over again

It’s always easy to judge in retrospect, though the Araujo pick was misguided at best and downright dumbfounding at worst. As easy as it is to say that we should take so and so when looking back at draft decisions, it is also just as easy to forget how many draft picks don’t pan out (not just our own, but other teams as well) and how much of a crapshoot drafting can really be.

The Joey Graham pick wasn’t viewed as a poor choice at the time. Joey tested out very well in workouts and was considered great value at the slot. He was being touted as a defensive stopper with the physical tools to be a dynamic force on both ends of the floor as his offense developed. I was rooting for Danny Granger at the number 9 slot, so that logically would have been a great pick but alas it wasn’t to be. Granger was more of a combo forward at the time and it was hard to see him becoming the type of versatile scoring wing that he has developed into. Unfortunately for us, what Joey showed us during workouts was essentially all he had, physical tools but lacking the basketball IQ to take advantage.

Charlie V was also flipped for TJ Ford after an impressive (though inconsistent) rookie year which was highlighted by a 48 point game against the Bucks. He outproduced many of the players drafted ahead of him that year (Marvin Williams, Martell Webster, Raymond Felton). If us fans had our way, we would have likely drafted Gerald Green at 9 or at 16 instead of Joey G, and we all know how that turned out.

David Lee barely snuck into the first round and would have been a stretch for us at 16. His lack of explosiveness and size was seen as his main weaknesses and drafting undersized forwards was rather unfashionable at the time. Such “stars” such as Fran Vasquez, Yaroslav Korolev, Wayne Simien, Sean May and Ike Diogu were taken ahead of him.

All in all, it’s hard to blame Babcock for the 2005 draft in light of the perceived value that we came away with at the time. Even Roko Ukic was considered a huge steal for us in the second round and was somebody that Raptors fans were excited about for a long time… until we actually saw him play (something about a 6’5" point guard that is always alluring). While I suppose you could argue that a good GM should be able to spot good talent, it’s easy to forget how difficult it is to predict a player’s performance in the NBA until they actually get there.

by TBJ on Jun 17, 2010 3:25 PM EDT reply actions

Isn’t that what Babcock and Scouting staff are for though? If we drafted only via preceived value.. then we’d have a poularity contest. As much as I hate Zeke (Isiah Thomas), he has a knack of picking draft talent (F/A talent not so much).

by Ustation on Jun 17, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions

I suppose it can be a rather circular argument. The problem for the Babcock and Co. was that the players we took just didn’t develop. While an argument can be made that we should have done our homework and anticipated that Joey G would fall flat and players like David Lee have the intangibles to overcome physical limitations, I find it difficult to hold Babcock and Co. accountable for that. While psychological assessments through interviews and mental accuity tests are great, it’s still a rather inexact science and requires a lot of guesswork (which by my list of big man prospects shows, ends in failure most of the time).

My take on the NBA draft is that management should be able to effectively evaluate the tangible qualities. First and foremost, they should be able to evaluate the current value of players through their skills and physical attributes. The ability of coaches and scouts to do so at this point is pretty universal, either through watching tapes and games or through the evaluation of statistics. Projecting for potential is an important component of player evaluation, but should be secondary to what we should know about what the player can do today since it is considerably more inexact (i.e. know what they are capable of doing that as a baseline to projecting them for the future). What Babcock and Co. did so ineffectively in the 2004 draft was in the evaluation of the attributes of Araujo. Everybody could plainly see that Araujo was a below-average athlete with t-rex arms. While he wasn’t a bad player, his current value did not justify an 8th selection in a draft. Furthermore, as an older player, his potential for growth as a player was questionable. While he was being sold as an NBA-ready big man to help plug up the lane, he was everything but that. Babcock and Co. clearly overvalued what Araujo could do today (from what I can remember, Juan Mendez , who went undrafted, dismantled him during their workout), thus fouling up the evaluation of Araujo as a player.

Going back to the 2005 draft, the players we took (Charlie V, Joey G, Roko) were talented players with perceived upside. All of these players made it to the NBA and earned minutes (whether or not they became stars is for another discussion). The same cannot be said of Araujo, who is out of the league already. While the aforementioned trio didn’t develop as well as was expected (hoped?), these players did exactly what we thought they were going to do and just didn’t grow beyond that point. Charlie V was, and still is, an offensively gifted big forward with a questionable motor and lackadaisical defence. Joey G is still an athletic freak who, like the Scarecrow from Wizard of Oz, has no brain. Roko is a big point guard with good vision but no range. Why they are busts is because they didn’t develop, not because we didn’t evaluate their skills appropriately. Araujo, on the other hand, was seen as a big body with Brad Miller-type versatility. Unfortunately, Araujo showed no skills that would make us believe he ever had that in him, which is why the 2004 draft and Babcock will go down in infamy.

by TBJ on Jun 19, 2010 12:00 AM EDT up reply actions

1. Old C who dominated D-II NCAA while on steroids, genius pick. AI was the pick there, I can forgive not reaching down for Jefferson (purely PF) and Smith a little less. Little did I know this was only the beginning of our drafting shenanigans.

2. Huge miss on Bynum.

People were criticizing him because he was too fat in high school. Well, he was only 17 (youngest player ever drafted). He got into a pre-draft camp, dropped a ton of weight and instead of picking potential franchise C (which we needed), we picked a lazy PF who is nothing but a poor man’s Lamar Odom.

3. I also thought we were gonna get Granger for sure, once he was there at 16. No dice!

4. We need rebounding and D. What better way to address it than to draft a player who contributes none of it! And so the BC era began, with me steaming from both ears.

by bigweeze on Jun 19, 2010 7:28 PM EDT reply actions

Bynum

Hopefully the rumours of Bosh sign-and-trade to L.A. for Bynum (+ rack of balls and large cheese pizza for Hedo) come to fruition. As much as I love Bosh, Bynum would be a good fit next to Il Mago given he comes back at full health.

by TBJ on Jun 20, 2010 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions