Side comment to Grocer, who asked “where do you find these solid role players”: he meant in the draft.

That’s not what Strat meant, which is who I was responding to.

In the interest of risk management, I would rather pay for one in free agency (since they’re capped often far below their actual open-market value) or trade for one than try to see the future in the draft — in the former scenario, you are 100% sure of what you’re getting.

…

Outside of Zion, there is no sure thing in this draft. And Zion is a prospect that beats you over the head with his violent, beautiful greatness. Just play the numbers game: there will be a higher success rate on finding WS48 .150 players than .250 players because of the sheer dumb math of it: there are simply more of them to go around. A lot more.

I strongly agree with this draft philosophy once you’re outside the range of players who will obviously be stars. It’s much easier to hit a single or double in the draft than a home run, and we always swing for the fences. Conversely, not only are you more likely to hit a home run in free agency when you know how good a player is, it’s actually a lot harder to hit a single or a double in free agency, because you usually have to overpay for those players. That’s how we end up with decent players like Lee and Hardaway on unmovable contracts.

Smart resource management would be using the draft to stock the roster with the guys who will fill the 3rd through 6th spots on your roster at a high level and using free agency and trades for your top 2.

(Side comment to Grocer, who asked “where do you find these solid role players”: he meant in the draft.)

Having said all that, I don’t know that these are arguments against Barrett. This classification of him as a volume scorer seems off to me. He has a wide range of skills and I don’t think it’s certain that he can’t be extremely good in the role of the 3rd or 4th option.

I guess what I’m getting at is that it’s better to take multiple guys who’ve actually produced at a high level lower down rather than take one guy you ‘hope’ ‘might’ produce at a high level in the top 3.

Yep. This seems obvious. And I think Strat has actually argued this before. And yet, here we are. The kicker is all the guys we’re discussing would be a pick em situation at 7-10 in a normal draft.

Aside from one or two sure things, the draft is a crapshoot, so it’s easier when you have twice as many picks per year.

But on the other hand, Harden was picked 3rd, KD 2nd, Anthony Davis 1st, Embiid 3rd, Simmons 1st, Kyrie 1st, Westbrook 4th, and Oladipo 2nd.

None of the top 5 picks had numbers as mediocre as RJ in college except Oladipo in his first seasons and Westbrook, and those two guys had much better defensive numbers than RJ. And Oladipo proved he could play at a high level as a junior. I guess what I’m getting at is that it’s better to take multiple guys who’ve actually produced at a high level lower down rather than take one guy you ‘hope’ ‘might’ produce at a high level in the top 3.

You can draft one, trade for one, or get one in free agency, but you won’t get one focusing on solid role players lower in the draft that represent good value unless you get VERY lucky.

Missing: any actual evidence or acknowledgement that outside of ‘sure things,’ stars aren’t significantly more likely to come from the top of the draft. Your argument remains an appeal to the talent projecting abilities of authorities that we know are extremely bad at projecting talent.

It’s not hard to find those solid role players. It’s hard to find stars.

The Knicks might be about to sign two max stars. Where precisely do you think we’re going to get these solid role players at the vet minimum? The solid role player tree? You make this claim all the damn time. Yes, it is hard to find a star in the draft. It’s also hard to sign one in free agency, or to get one via trade. It is also hard to find solid role players on the budget you have left after acquiring said stars if you’ve not already got them on value contracts.

In the interest of risk management, I would rather pay for one in free agency (since they’re capped often far below their actual open-market value) or trade for one than try to see the future in the draft — in the former scenario, you are 100% sure of what you’re getting. Was there any real doubt (i.e. not talk-radio punditry) that Durant would be great on the Dubs? Garnett on the Celts? Gasol on the Lakers? LeBron on the Heatles? Chris Paul on the Clippers? (Note that all of those players arrived at their destination and immediately competed deep in the playoffs, if not winning outright. None of them arrived on a shitty roster that needed to be built up around them, even if LeBron was not well served by Mario Chalmers and Joel Anthony as starters on his first Heat squad.)

Outside of Zion, there is no sure thing in this draft. And Zion is a prospect that beats you over the head with his violent, beautiful greatness. Just play the numbers game: there will be a higher success rate on finding WS48 .150 players than .250 players because of the sheer dumb math of it: there are simply more of them to go around. A lot more.

Last year weren’t there a bunch of indicators they were going with Knox? Maybe I’m remembering that wrong.

I don’t have time to address your post point by point.

In general we are on the same page. We are both value oriented.

Where we differ is in our way of valuing players. I’m more into using stats as a way of filling out a checklist of skills on both sides of the ball (and their degree) to come to an overall assessment and player “profile”. Then I think in terms of trying to put the pieces and profiles together in a way that maximizes the team output.

I think you need at least a couple of multi skilled high usage above average efficiency scorers (the more efficient the better) to contend. Those are the hardest players to get. You can draft one, trade for one, or get one in free agency, but you won’t get one focusing on solid role players lower in the draft that represent good value unless you get VERY lucky.

In a coin toss decision, imo we need to star hunt. It’s not hard to find those solid role players. It’s hard to find stars.

(I am open to trading draft picks to get bona fide stars)