Leonard and George to Clippers

SemperFidelisSox

suzyn
SoSH Member
May 25, 2008
17,881
Boston, MA
Lebron + Davis + Kuzma + McGee + Danny Green + Quinn Cook + Cousins + Caruso + Rondo

If they add Morris and Iggy, that's a good roster.

Not bad for Plan B. Better than Golden State and Clippers.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,756
How long did he stay though? Perhaps it’s one thing to see it but another to be on the same team.
He re-signed there after playing with Westbrook for a year, and only left because the best player in the NBA told the Clippers he’d sign with them if they acquired Paul George. It also seems unfair to blame Westbrook for OKC’s owners trading James Harden in order to dodge the luxury tax.
 

oumbi

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 15, 2006
2,269
That's why the NBA keeps James Dolan's checkbook around.

New York City and the Knicks are so built for fashionista Russell Westbrook. He can put up his hollow stats and holler at the younger players to a 30 win season AND spend his off time in the garment district working in the shmata trade.

Can't help myself, going for the trifecta here with Lakerfreude, Philly Heists, and Knick buffoonery...:banana:
And if Davis leaves the Lakers next year, then everyone here will have no choice but to believe that there is a God, and He is good.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,635
Santa Monica
Lebron + Davis + Kuzma + McGee + Danny Green + Quinn Cook + Cousins + Caruso + Rondo

If they add Morris and Iggy, that's a good roster.

Not bad for Plan B. Better than Golden State and Clippers.
Have to be joking right? Clippers already have a rock solid group of role players, that have some continuity, with Doc Rivers that has done this before with Jerry West who isn't finished.

vs Vogel/Kidd/Pelinka

PLUS that's an aged Laker crew that doesn't last the season.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
21,715
The Clippers have a better third scorer (Williams) and a more coherent set of role players---Beverly, Harrell, etc. all make sense together and fit wtih the stars.

I don't think it's very close, frankly. The Lakers have done ok given when they started, but if they had decided at the beginning of FA they wanted to forego a third star and build with role players, they'd be a lot better off right now---and they sure wouldn't have Rondo or KCP anywhere near the roster.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,756
Lebron + Davis + Kuzma + McGee + Danny Green + Quinn Cook + Cousins + Caruso + Rondo

If they add Morris and Iggy, that's a good roster.

Not bad for Plan B. Better than Golden State and Clippers.
Wait, what? A 48 win team just replaced Gallinari and a rookie PG with the best player in the NBA and Paul George. I think their Plan A trumps LOL’s Plan 9 from Outer Space (and I’ll be surprised if Mook signs there as depth as there are going to be other teams with more playing time for him).
 

lars10

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
5,353
He re-signed there after playing with Westbrook for a year, and only left because the best player in the NBA told the Clippers he’d sign with them if they acquired Paul George. It also seems unfair to blame Westbrook for OKC’s owners trading James Harden in order to dodge the luxury tax.
That’s fair.. I was just wondering if there was any feeling of players not wanting to play with him.. just seems like, even though he hustles and puts in the work, that he’d be tough to play with since he dominates the ball so much and always seems to be the alpha.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,470
Yeah, the Clippers should be clearly favored to win the West, although Vegas may give a slight edge to the Lakers (because, Lakers). Their roster top to bottom is both better and stronger than that of the Lakers.

Lakers should probably the favorite for the #2 seed, but will have heavy competition from Nuggets, Warriors (assuming Klay comes back healthy), Portland, and Utah, maybe Houston.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,540
Kiev, Ukraine
Yeah, the Clippers should be clearly favored to win the West, although Vegas may give a slight edge to the Lakers (because, Lakers). Their roster top to bottom is both better and stronger than that of the Lakers.

Lakers should probably the favorite for the #2 seed, but will have heavy competition from Nuggets, Warriors (assuming Klay comes back healthy), Portland, and Utah, maybe Houston.
Regardless of what you think of their playoff chances, I’d hammer the under on Laker regular season wins.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,756
That’s fair.. I was just wondering if there was any feeling of players not wanting to play with him.. just seems like, even though he hustles and puts in the work, that he’d be tough to play with since he dominates the ball so much and always seems to be the alpha.
OKC screwed up, but I don’t think it’s any reflection on Westbrook, if they didn’t unload a future MVP in order to dodge the luxury tax they likely win a title or two and Durant never goes ring-chasing in his prime (which was the unprecedented part). And it was clearly ring-chasing considering he worked at way below max wages to go to Golden State. So that Harden trade turned into a franchise killer.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,691
Yeah, the Clippers should be clearly favored to win the West, although Vegas may give a slight edge to the Lakers (because, Lakers). Their roster top to bottom is both better and stronger than that of the Lakers.

Lakers should probably the favorite for the #2 seed, but will have heavy competition from Nuggets, Warriors (assuming Klay comes back healthy), Portland, and Utah, maybe Houston.
I think that's spot on though I would rank Utah ahead of Portland and, perhaps, the Warriors at this point. They had a very good offseason.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,677
Portsmouth, NH
Yeah, the Clippers should be clearly favored to win the West, although Vegas may give a slight edge to the Lakers (because, Lakers). Their roster top to bottom is both better and stronger than that of the Lakers.

Lakers should probably the favorite for the #2 seed, but will have heavy competition from Nuggets, Warriors (assuming Klay comes back healthy), Portland, and Utah, maybe Houston.
I don’t see LBJ and AD playing enough games to get the 2 seed. They’ll both take 20 off or so I’d imagine and there’s too much talent in conference. Their goal will likely be 4.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,635
Santa Monica
Yes, I assumed he meant trading for him now, which was stupid on my part since he mentioned Dec. 15 in his post.
no worries. Grant is the kind of young, improving (3pt%), long (7'3" wingspan), athletic, shot blocking 4 the Celtics really could use

I guess the bigger question is why would OKC move Grant? All I have is he'll get expensive next off-season and they want to collect draft picks and/or controllable/cheap youngsters
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
9,038
Waltham, MA
Yeah, the Clippers should be clearly favored to win the West, although Vegas may give a slight edge to the Lakers (because, Lakers). Their roster top to bottom is both better and stronger than that of the Lakers.

Lakers should probably the favorite for the #2 seed, but will have heavy competition from Nuggets, Warriors (assuming Klay comes back healthy), Portland, and Utah, maybe Houston.
They aren't. Clippers were immediate favorites post-trade.

But I would say they are probably giving lower odds than they should for the Lakers (because, Lakers).
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,540
Kiev, Ukraine
I think that's spot on though I would rank Utah ahead of Portland and, perhaps, the Warriors at this point. They had a very good offseason.
If we're talking regular season, I'd say Utah is way ahead of the Warriors (just because of Klay's timetable), and probably ahead of Portland. When is Nurkic back? That drastically affects all things Blazer.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
9,782
Somewhere
no worries. Grant is the kind of young, improving (3pt%), long (7'3" wingspan), athletic, shot blocking 4 the Celtics really could use

I guess the bigger question is why would OKC move Grant?
Money as you said and the fact that he doesn’t have a lot more upside in his future. Great role player though.
 

SemperFidelisSox

suzyn
SoSH Member
May 25, 2008
17,881
Boston, MA
No one seems to care that Paul George basically forced his way out in year 1 of a 5 year max deal with OKC. It seems as of now players hold all the power and teams hold none. It started with Kawhi ghosting the Spurs last season. Long term deals, even super max deals, mean nothing anymore.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
9,782
Somewhere
No one seems to care that Paul George basically forced his way out in year 1 of a 5 year max deal with OKC. It seems as of now players hold all the power and teams hold none. It started with Kawhi ghosting the Spurs last season. Long term deals, even super max deals, mean nothing anymore.
They didn’t have to deal him. The Clippers made it worth their while.
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
1,751
No one seems to care that Paul George basically forced his way out in year 1 of a 5 year max deal with OKC. It seems as of now players hold all the power and teams hold none. It started with Kawhi ghosting the Spurs last season. Long term deals, even super max deals, mean nothing anymore.
The owners did it to themselves. For starters they need a franchise tag in the next CBA.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,691
No one seems to care that Paul George basically forced his way out in year 1 of a 5 year max deal with OKC. It seems as of now players hold all the power and teams hold none. It started with Kawhi ghosting the Spurs last season. Long term deals, even super max deals, mean nothing anymore.
Its fascinating that he was able to do this but to be fair (as Devizier points out), Presti didn't just give him away. He knew that the Clippers needed to make the trade and he made it hurt. Those picks are valuable currency at the very least and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander is, in some ways, a more valuable version of a first round pick if only because has already he showed he can play in the NBA. Gallinari is useful, if only as a player and then an expiring down the road.

That said, you are right - if a star under a contract becomes disenchanted, they can force a blow-up at will. I strongly suspect we will see more of these situations where teams go from contenders to rebuilding in the course of a few months.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
35,941
With all these forced team ups, have any college teammates shot their way to a reunion in the pros? It seems risky to put all that effort into playing with someone you’ve never been on the same side of a team with before.
 

DrewDawg

Dorito Dink
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
35,282
They didn’t have to deal him. The Clippers made it worth their while.
ESPN Radio said today that had George not been dealt, that within hours of Kawhi signing somewhere, we would have had a Woj Bomb that PG wanted out. And, that OKC not dealt him to LAC with Kawhi, their leverage would have been almost nil, instead of 2 teams bidding him up.

Apparently, despite appearances, he and RWB don't get along all that well.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
17,677
Portsmouth, NH
With all these forced team ups, have any college teammates shot their way to a reunion in the pros? It seems risky to put all that effort into playing with someone you’ve never been on the same side of a team with before.
Most of these guys are one and done in college, I’m not sure it would offer that much more than a typical offseason of Team USA camps and workouts.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,470
Star players have forced trades before: Kareem and Wilt.

What's different is that the max contract makes it so that teams can more easily fit multiple veteran stars onto their rosters. It doesn't take too many players for OKC and LAC to match salaries for the trade; Gallinari made only $10M less than Paul George (or about 2/3 of PG's salary). Agents know this, and so they can show their clients all sorts of way to get to their preferred locations.
 

Montana Fan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
7,944
Twin Bridges, Mt.
Couple thoughts on this.

1. Love the result, Lakers foiled, the team that set themselves up properly, the Clips, rewarded. Same thing happened in NY.

2. As a GM the trades that both LA teams made are embarrassingly weak. They were both bent over the table, Lakers by the Pels and Clips by OKC, when it was determined they must make a deal. They pretty much gave every asset they had to get the deals done. They showed how bad it is to be negotiating from a position of weakness. Mortgage the future completely for a shot in the next 2-3 years. That all sounds good now and it's likely someone else will have to clean up the mess.

3. Am very interested in what will happen in the dynamic of LA fandom. Obviously the Lakers are LA's team but the Lakers are a cobbled together team with two players (hired guns) coming off injury while the Clips are a well built team with two LA kids returning home. If you're an LA hoops junkie, who are you going to be more invested in? I'll be pulling for the Clips to break Laker fan's hearts next year.

4. Lastly, seems like everyone is overlooking the W's. If Klay is truly coming back around February, the W's will be my favorite to win it all. Health permitting of course.

5. edit: really lastly, hoping Westbrook gets traded to the Knicks and OKC racks up all their picks and controls the Knicks draft for the next 5-7 years as well.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,540
Kiev, Ukraine
Couple thoughts on this.

1. Love the result, Lakers foiled, the team that set themselves up properly, the Clips, rewarded. Same thing happened in NY.

2. As a GM the trades that both LA teams made are embarrassingly weak. They were both bent over the table, Lakers by the Pels and Clips by OKC, when it was determined they must make a deal. They pretty much gave every asset they had to get the deals done. They showed how bad it is to be negotiating from a position of weakness. Mortgage the future completely for a shot in the next 2-3 years. That all sounds good now and it's likely someone else will have to clean up the mess.

3. Am very interested in what will happen in the dynamic of LA fandom. Obviously the Lakers are LA's team but the Lakers are a cobbled together team with two players (hired guns) coming off injury while the Clips are a well built team with two LA kids returning home. If you're an LA hoops junkie, who are you going to be more invested in? I'll be pulling for the Clips to break Laker fan's hearts next year.

4. Lastly, seems like everyone is overlooking the W's. If Klay is truly coming back around February, the W's will be my favorite to win it all. Health permitting of course.

5. edit: really lastly, hoping Westbrook gets traded to the Knicks and OKC racks up all their picks and controls the Knicks draft for the next 5-7 years as well.
Dubs are getting overlooked for a reason—they’re really, really thin, and the main piece they added, DAR, is redundant. I absolutely think they can challenge for a championship the year after, but they need to get out from under the hard cap and spin DAR into more complementary pieces.
 

oumbi

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 15, 2006
2,269
Couple thoughts on this.

1. Love the result, Lakers foiled, the team that set themselves up properly, the Clips, rewarded. Same thing happened in NY.

2. As a GM the trades that both LA teams made are embarrassingly weak. They were both bent over the table, Lakers by the Pels and Clips by OKC, when it was determined they must make a deal. They pretty much gave every asset they had to get the deals done. They showed how bad it is to be negotiating from a position of weakness. Mortgage the future completely for a shot in the next 2-3 years. That all sounds good now and it's likely someone else will have to clean up the mess.

3. Am very interested in what will happen in the dynamic of LA fandom. Obviously the Lakers are LA's team but the Lakers are a cobbled together team with two players (hired guns) coming off injury while the Clips are a well built team with two LA kids returning home. If you're an LA hoops junkie, who are you going to be more invested in? I'll be pulling for the Clips to break Laker fan's hearts next year.

4. Lastly, seems like everyone is overlooking the W's. If Klay is truly coming back around February, the W's will be my favorite to win it all. Health permitting of course.

5. edit: really lastly, hoping Westbrook gets traded to the Knicks and OKC racks up all their picks and controls the Knicks draft for the next 5-7 years as well.
On point number two above, yes, these are both Faustian trades, but I can also see them as being reasonable and not automatically dooming each franchise. In each case the teams traded away draft picks for the next 6 to 7 years. But, for the first 3 years of that time span they are contenders for the NBA world championship. So, their mortgaged future is really more like a window of 3 years or so. But, maybe they can extend their championship run by bringing in new free agent stars when a current one retires. Or they trade them away as salary ballast and open up cap space. Using draft picks to acquire young talent is only one way to build a team.

What they give up is substantial in the number of picks, but not necessarily all that valuable in terms of the return on each pick should it be used. Moreover, since these teams will be in contention for 3 years, those picks are less valuable in the short term. And the next 3 years of picks may or may not have great value. The Nets lost valuable picks, but they managed to recover via free agency...a least somewhat.

So, yes, it is a Faustian deal for each team. It is a gamble. But, at the same time the ultimate risk seems substantially less than losing their souls...which, since they are LA teams, they did not have to begin with.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
9,782
Somewhere
In financial terms I would say that the Lakers and Clippers are heavily leveraged for a major acquisition. If it works out, none the wiser. But the risk is substantial. I for one like that teams are willing to pursue risky paths again. Yes it sucked for the Nets but the league kept rolling. Would anyone shed a tear if the Lakers turned into a trash fire?
 

DavidTai

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
701
Herndon, VA
Even with that, the Clippers feel like a team that has just enough up front to be able to make -some- moves with a front office that's smart enough to capitalize on what's available.

The Lakers feel like a top-heavy jenga tower that needs to move very carefully or the whole thing topples.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,691
The Clippers did what they had to do and appear to be the deeper team.

That said, both George and Leonard have injury histories with the former's shoulder impacting his play in the playoffs this year. If these guys break down or, worse yet, somehow don't win it all over the next few years even without injuries, they have mortgaged their future pretty heavily, regardless of where the picks they traded actually fall.

IMHO, both franchises gambled heavily so while the Clippers may be "smarter", their downside is essentially the same - a future where they don't have many assets to use to get better.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,540
Kiev, Ukraine
The Clippers did what they had to do and appear to be the deeper team.

That said, both George and Leonard have injury histories with the former's shoulder impacting his play in the playoffs this year. If these guys break down or, worse yet, somehow don't win it all over the next few years even without injuries, they have mortgaged their future pretty heavily, regardless of where the picks they traded actually fall.

IMHO, both franchises gambled heavily so while the Clippers may be "smarter", their downside is essentially the same - a future where they don't have many assets to use to get better.
Agree with this, although there's one key difference--the Clippers are already deep, without really any assets to get better. The Lakers are shallow, without really any assets to get better. Just because of that, I like the Clippers route better.
 

Tony C

Dope
Dope
Apr 13, 2000
11,077
I guess I'm not quite seeing the Clippers depth. I'm a quasi-Clippers fan (i.e, I live in L.A. so vaguely root for them -- but not with my heart like real fan just more in the they're the local team I'll follow sort of way), but I think they're being overrated some. Here for example is Carmelo's chart:

That doesn't show a lot of depth.

You have to add to that the injury risk of their 3rd best player, Beverly, and Leonard's injury history, too (I assume PG's shoulder stuff is fixed rather than chronic). I'm not sure I buy Carmelo's listing the West's regular season best as Rockets, Lakers, Warriors, Clippers in that order. But I do think the Clippers' depth is being overrated just due to how they overachieved from last year. From that team they've lost Shai, Dino (who was terrific last season) and what Harris contributed while adding Shamet, PG, and :Leonard. Obviously great moves and all hail Jerry West -- he is everything the Lakers' management is not -- but, that said, they're top heavy.

In the playoffs...the Clippers will be scary as hell. The West is going to be so much fun next year...and the playoffs will be a blast -- with KT back by that time for GS, too.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
3,231
New York City
really lastly, hoping Westbrook gets traded to the Knicks and OKC racks up all their picks and controls the Knicks draft for the next 5-7 years as well.
If OKC could turn PG and Westbrook into a few solid young players like SGA and whoever the Knicks would be giving up, a few expiring contracts, and a shitload of relatively unprotected first-rounders for the next 5ish years, that’s about as good a team could possibly do in a rebuild IMO.
 

bowiac

I've been living a lie.
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,324
New York, NY
I guess I'm not quite seeing the Clippers depth. I'm a quasi-Clippers fan (i.e, I live in L.A. so vaguely root for them -- but not with my heart like real fan just more in the they're the local team I'll follow sort of way), but I think they're being overrated some. Here for example is Carmelo's chart:

That doesn't show a lot of depth.
This shows seven players at average or better, plus Lou Williams who is a high end guy on one side of the ball. That would make the Clippers among the deepest teams in the league. To compare, last year the Raptors last year had six players who fit that mold. The Celtics had five (538 also graded Theis and TimeLord above average, but they were not in the rotation). The Rockets had four. The Warriors had six. I haven't gone team by team, but seven players at average or better may be the highest number in the league.

The Clippers are exceptionally deep.
 

bowiac

I've been living a lie.
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,324
New York, NY
Unrelatedly, one point I made on twitter this morning which that I haven't seen much discussion of in light of the Davis and Paul George trades is that the draft is likely going to become substantially less predictable and efficient by the time many of the later draft picks convey. This is because we're likely going to have high school players in the draft by then.

With high schoolers, you have a year less of data to evaluate them based on, and the data quality is much worse (both because the data available from HS is literally less granular than NCAA data, and because the data is collected against weaker competition). Additionally, you're missing a year of player growth and development by drafting players at age 17/18 than at age 18/19, which is salient since you're mostly drafting players for how well they'll play for their age 21+ seasons, not for the value they'll provide in their rookie seasons (when almost all rookies are bad). The specifics of how strong this effect will be remain up in the air, but to some degree you're going to see the value of high picks decline and the value of late picks increase as the draft becomes even more of a crapshoot.

This is salient for the Pelicans and Thunder insofar as it increases the likely value of those 2022 and beyond picks. Their chances of getting an impact players at pick 20 are higher than they would be in the current draft environment.
 
Last edited:

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,540
Kiev, Ukraine
Unrelatedly, one point I made on twitter this morning which that I haven't seen much discussion of in light of the Davis and Paul George trades is that the draft is likely going to become substantially less predictable and efficient by the time many of draft picks convey. This is because we're likely going to have high school players in the draft by then.

With high schoolers, you have a year less of data to evaluate them based on, and the data quality is much worse (both because the data available from HS is literally less granular than NCAA data, and because the data is collected against weaker competition). Additionally, you're missing a year of player growth and development by drafting players at age 17/18 than at age 18/19, which is salient since you're mostly drafting players for how well they'll play for their age 21+ seasons, not for the value they'll provide in their rookie seasons (when almost all rookies are bad). The specifics of how strong this effect will be remain up in the air, but to some degree you're going to see the value of high picks decline and the value of late picks increase as the draft becomes even more of a crapshoot.

This is salient for the Pelicans and Thunder insofar as it increases the likely value of those 2022 and beyond picks. Their chances of getting an impact players at pick 20 are higher than they would be in the current draft environment.
Really interesting point—who were examples of impact HSers being drafted at value spots under the old system? I remember Kobe went 13 or so, but that was because of worries he wouldn’t play for non-Lakers teams iirc.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
10,123
Rashard Lewis was 2nd round pick, 32nd overall
Jermaine O'neal was the 17th overall pick.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,756
Really interesting point—who were examples of impact HSers being drafted at value spots under the old system? I remember Kobe went 13 or so, but that was because of worries he wouldn’t play for non-Lakers teams iirc.
From memory Al Jefferson, Jermaine O’Neal, Josh Smith, and JR Smith were drafted in the teens. Kendrick Perkins, Al Harrington, and DeShawn Stevenson went in the 20s. In the second round Rashard Lewis, Monta Ellis, and Sweet Lou Williams got picked.
 

bowiac

I've been living a lie.
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,324
New York, NY
Really interesting point—who were examples of impact HSers being drafted at value spots under the old system? I remember Kobe went 13 or so, but that was because of worries he wouldn’t play for non-Lakers teams iirc.
From perusing this list, there are the usual set of busts (Kwame, Jonathan Bender, Telfair), and you also have some good values (Lewis, Kobe, Monta, Amir). The impact of HS kids will also be incremental by pushing kids who do still go college further down the draft as well. So the next Damian Lillard may go 14th instead of 6th in the future, since many of the top picks will be HS kids. The "value" picks in other words won't be limited to HS draftees.

Generally, as I understand it, going straight from high school had a substantial amount of stigma at first, so even sure first round picks were mostly going to college then, just because that's what you were supposed to do. It was a pretty brief window between when KG decides to skip college, and when they changed the rule, so I don't know how much we really learn there (though it's worth investigating further). That stigma may not be there this time around.

I think it's overwhelming likely that the draft will become less predictable with HS kids involved, but the degree will depend on how HS players approach it, and how the NCAA responds. If it's only likely top 10 picks skipping college, it's going to be a different impact than if every likely first rounder declares for the draft.
 
Last edited:

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,540
Kiev, Ukraine
From perusing this list, there are the usual set of busts (Kwame, Jonathan Bender, Telfair), and you also have some good values (Lewis, Kobe, Monta, Amir). The impact of HS kids will also be incremental by pushing kids who do still go college further down the draft as well. So the next Damian Lillard may go 14th instead of 6th in the future, since many of the top picks will be HS kids. The "value" picks in other words won't be limited to HS draftees.

Generally, as I understand it, going straight from high school had a substantial amount of stigma at first, so even sure first round picks were mostly going to college then, just because that's what you were supposed to do. It was a pretty brief window between when KG decides to skip college, and when they changed the rule, so I don't know how much we really learn there (though it's worth investigating further). That stigma may not be there this time around.

I think it's overwhelming likely that the draft will become less predictable with HS kids involved, but the degree will depend on how HS players approach it, and how the NCAA responds. If it's only likely top 10 picks skipping college, it's going to be a different impact than if every likely first rounder declares for the draft.
Gun to my head, I’d guess that most likely 1st rounders declare. The hype cycle starts early now, and with the amount of attention top HSers get, I imagine lots of them will want to get drafted while they can.

Which would support your overall point.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
9,782
Somewhere
Really interesting point—who were examples of impact HSers being drafted at value spots under the old system? I remember Kobe went 13 or so, but that was because of worries he wouldn’t play for non-Lakers teams iirc.
Old friend Kendrick Perkins.

Also the high school reaches that featured prominently in the early 00's drafts pushed quality college guys like Gil Arenas and Carlos Boozer into the second round.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,916
around the way
I can see things changing a lot in the top-3, top-5, as HS guys can enter the draft. But IMO that means freshmen guys that might have gone 2 or 3 dropping to 5 or 6. If you get a top 10 pick, you're still getting someone damn solid. Of course HS kids introduce variance, but if you want the Ja Morant in that draft, you're still taking him.

Great point that it changes things, but I think that it will be at least a decade out before we see 7-8 HS kids drafted in the top 10.