↓ Login/Logout ↓
Schedule/Results
↓ Roster ↓
Salaries
↓ Archives ↓
↓ About ↓

Joe Dumars wrong to declare 2013 NBA Draft has ‘no franchise changers’

Me at the Detroit Free Press:

Joe Dumars said he told team owner Tom Gores there are “no franchise changers in this draft.”

I strongly believe Dumars will be wrong.

The first step is defining the threshold for being a “franchise changer.” Initially, I planned to use the player who posted the fewest win shares while leading a championship-winning team in win shares, but there were too many outliers, and that would have set the bar too low.

So I settled with Hakeem Olajuwon in 1994-95, when he led the Houston Rockets to the NBA title and posted 10.7 win shares. Though he was 32 and on the downturn of his career at that point, he still made the All-NBA second team the next year and the All-NBA third team the following year. He still had plenty of juice left.

We can all agree Olajuwon played like a “franchise changer” in 1994-95, right?

Since the NBA-ABA merger, 32 of 35 drafts have produced at least one player who produced a season as good as Olajuwon’s in 1994-95.

The only three drafts that haven’t are 2010, 2011 and 2012, and that’s only because those players haven’t yet had a chance to blossom and make their mark. It’s crazy to believe 2010 picks (such as Paul George, John Wall, Greg Monroe and DeMarcus Cousins), 2011 picks (such as Kyrie Irving, Kenneth Faried, Kawhi Leonard and Chandler Parsons) and 2012 (such as Anthony Davis, Andre Drummond, Damian Lillard and Bradley Beal) won’t elevate their draft classes into the same stature as every other class.

In other words, every single NBA draft in the modern era had produced a "franchise-changer" or will. Every. Single. One.

Some have panned the 2013 draft class as historically bad, and for Dumars to be right, the critics would have to be correct. I just don’t see this group as such an extreme exception, even if we can’t identify the “franchise changers” at this very moment. As always, someone will emerge.

69 Comments

  • May 31, 20133:15 pm
    by Julien

    Reply

    Does the 2000 draft only get there thanks to Michael Redd’s career year in 05-06?

    • May 31, 20134:08 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      Must be. And he posted a 10.8 that year.

  • May 31, 20133:19 pm
    by Crispus

    Reply

    I do not intend to be a troll, but I feel I have to say this. There’s something deeply tactless about your writing Dan. It’s not that you are particularly vulgar or aggressive, it just seems that every point you make that could be crafted to be neutral comes off as somewhat harsh and inconsiderate. This caused a firestorm with the Drummond draft article (sunglassesgate), but I don’t think it ended there.

    Again, I’m not saying this to insult you, I just find the tone deafness of many of these posts and articles to be tiresome, especially when they extend to speculation, rumors and future events. You don’t have to write sunny propaganda or delude yourself (or us), but please think about being a little more considerate. These are people you are writing about, people who struggle and worry and have hopes and fears and moments of self-consciousness. I mean for goodness sake, you start your freep article by insulting (though not personally) five of this year’s top prospects!

    I’ll still read the blog and appreciate the work you do, but I had to say something.

    • May 31, 20135:09 pm
      by Steve K

      Reply

      That was his point. Anybody can poke holes in their games. Dumars is saying there are no game-changers because all he sees is the negatives.
       
      History has shown that (almost) every draft DOES produce a game-changer, despite the players seen as lacking skills.

    • May 31, 20138:22 pm
      by Haan

      Reply

      I suspect that Dumars was a bit careless in his wording and that he meant something to the effect of there being no likely or surefire or consensus franchise changers.  I think he was trying to locate the silver lining to a crummy draft lottery outcome. Consonant with this interpretation, he surely remembers that a Ben Wallace or a Dennis Rodman (or in the NFL, a Tom Brady or Bart Starr) can come out of the blue, so that draft projections aren’t fully reliable.  If it’s an instance of sloppiness or seeking to be optimistic more than an insistence on an ontological fact, then Dan’s historical recollection seems overwrought as a response, I would agree.  That said, Dan’s facts all seem to be in order.  But there’s some talking past each other, I’d guess. 

    • May 31, 20139:06 pm
      by Sop

      Reply

      Everyone worth their salt agrees that was a “historically bad” draft. I agree with Dan that this draft isn’t that bad. But I think its mincing words to dissect Dumars’ comment with this sort of statistical definition. What Joe probably meant was there are no “franchise-players” in this draft. All players change franchises to some or even minute extent, but a “franchise-players” is commonly understood as the best player on the team and is usually used to connote the best player on at least a playoff level team who the franchise prioritizes resigning. I would agree with that assessment because I doubt that Noel, McLemore, Porter, Oladipo, Bennett, Burke, Muhammed, or any other 2013 prospect will ever LEAD their team deep into the playoffs. That doesn’t mean that at 8 the Pistons can’t get a player of comparable value to top 10 players in most previous drafts. It means, as has been so frequently repeated this year, that the very top of the draft lacks Shaqlike, Duncanlike, Lebronlike talent. Clearly. This is not a new sentiment Dumars is repeating, it is the common group think of NBA minds right now. THAT is the really disconcerting thing about this Dumars quote. It sounds like he’s regurgitating a line he picked up around other GMs and scouts lately. It makes him sound like he’s not a free thinker but rather is follower who then innately fall behind the trends. This would explain his debacle of CV and BG, as he had some catchy idea that the league was evolving into a place where shooting was more important that defense. People who laud him for drafting Monroe and Drummond need to remember that those were no-brainer picks. In reality his best picks may have been Afflalo and Jerebko which don’t offset Darko and Daye. It’s likely that Dumars’ strategy for this summer’s free agency will also be guided by some delusional vision of what the league will look like in 5 years. That is why Dumars is ultimately all of our worst nightmares for the future of our team.

      • Jun 1, 201311:39 pm
        by tarsier

        Reply

        “ a “franchise-players” is commonly understood as the best player on the team and is usually used to connote the best player on at least a playoff level team who the franchise prioritizes resigning. I would agree with that assessment because I doubt that Noel, McLemore, Porter, Oladipo, Bennett, Burke, Muhammed, or any other 2013 prospect will ever LEAD their team deep into the playoffs”

        Then you are almost certainly wrong. I won’t pick one and say that he is that guy, but it would have to be an epicly horrible draft (of the 2000 caliber) for there to be no such guys.

  • May 31, 20133:35 pm
    by Ozzie-Moto

    Reply

    This is typical Dumars “safe play” attitude.  Down play the potential so you don’t look bad if your pic doesn’t pan out.  Sad. People say he has drafted well of late but really only took the consensus players that 99% of teams in that spot would take. Even then not sure Knight was the right pick.  Same with coaches. Here we have Brian Shaw an assistant with the pacers that are doing a pretty damn good against the Heat (could have easily been up 3/2) and their team is set up with 2 strong inside players (more old school paint pounders) which i have never seen mentioned by the press or JD that thats sort of the kind of team Detroit could be and we know that JD wants to try and resuscitate the carrier of M Cheeks or Nate Mc. In the end i think Shaw will get a better gig anyway but it is troubling the longest term GM is just stuck in the past and is hurting the team. Most of the coaches besides Pop and Woodson that got down the line in the playoffs were younger newer hires.  Time to move on.  

    On a side note i see CJ Mculllum shows up on a lot of draft boards as our pick.  One review said and I quote: ” CJ has the skills to be of value until he can hopefully grow into the point guard spot” Isn’t this the exact same BS that was said about Knight and Stuckey. Last thing the pistons need is having the team wait for another player to grow into anything especially the point guard spot.

    • May 31, 20136:42 pm
      by frankie d

      Reply

      regarding mccollum and knight and stuckey…
      the biggest difference, imho, is the BB IQ of those players.  stuckey plays like a braindead player and knight is not far behind him.  i know that knight has a reputation for being a very intelligent person and player, but i’ve yet to see it, either at kentucky or here in detroit.  both knight and stuckey play dumb.
      mccollum, on the other hand, plays with a great deal of on-court intelligence.   he scored, imho, because his team needed him to score.  but he showed excellent court vision and the ability to run the pick and roll with a good deal of patience.   he also has an excellent handle, unlike knight, who is very sloppy with the ball.   those are the kinds of things that he’ll be able to build on in the nba. 
      i’d also been totally against the idea of drafting another knight or stuckey, both of whom should never have been put in the position of full time PG.  i think mccollum is very different, as i realized after looking at him more closely.  i think he’s going to be one of the best players out of the draft, even if he’s drafted somewhere between 6-10.

      • Jun 1, 20133:32 am
        by oats

        Reply

        Stuckey was a better passer, and a similar scorer at Eastern Washington. His handle is pretty similar to McCollum’s. As for McCollum’s intelligence, that is really hard to determine if you start with the caveat that making what is a poor basketball decision in a normal situation is not poor when his team is terrible. I actually agree with the sentiment itself, but a player who is smartly playing hero ball and a player that is dumb but playing hero ball on a team that needs him to play that way looks identical. Stuckey’s need to jack up shots in college was exactly as big as McCollum’s, and yet he was still the better and more prolific passer. McCollum should be a better 3 point shooter than Stuckey, but it’s hard to say if he’s better than Knight at that considering how poor CJ shot it his first 3 years in school. There is definitely room for him to just split the difference between them as far as skill sets, which would make him a pretty darn similar player to them both over all.
         
        I’d call McCollum the better prospect, I’m just not convinced it’s by enough to make him an obvious top 8 pick. I think he’s most likely somewhere between Stuckey/Knight and Tyreke Evans. I’d also say he’s closer to the Stuckey/Knight side of that range. Don’t get me wrong, he could be really good. I just don’t see enough there to be convinced of it. I don’t trust his shooting explosion this year to hold up, and I’m not convinced a guy who was noticeably worse than Stuckey as a passer will magically turn it around on the next level. He might be the best prospect despite that, and he belongs in the list of guys to evaluate for the 8th pick, but I really don’t understand the confidence some people have in him.

        • Jun 1, 201311:07 pm
          by frankie d

          Reply

          i think stuckey has been ill-served his entire pistons’ career.  
          he’s been miscast and his talents have been misused.  he has huge holes in his game, but he also has very real talent.  the right coaches and system could make him a very valuable contributor.  unfortunately, he’s been stuck in detroit, where no one has really taken advantage of the real plusses he can bring to any team.
          that being said, i just think that mccollum sees the BB floor much better than stuckey ever has.  stuckey gets tunnel-vision on the basket and nothing is going to stop him from taking a shot, once that happens.  watching mccollum play – that duke game and through video clips – he seems to keep his head up and his eyes on the entire court, not just the basket. it is that quality that makes me believe – and it is strictly a belief at this point, pure conjecture – that he will be able to work as a point guard much more successfully than stuckey.  maybe i’m wrong.  we will see next year.
          but, if i’m right, and he does have the ability to work as a point guard in the nba, he will be easily worth picking #8 in this draft.  if he develops into a solid point guard, combined with his scoring ability, he’ll be the player joe dumars always dreamed stuckey could be. 

  • May 31, 20133:47 pm
    by G

    Reply

    This Dumars quote appeared to be an attempt to justify not tanking. He was trying to promote a reality where it doesn’t matter if the Pistons pick 4th or 9th in this draft because the class is so weak. While this class lacks the star power the prior several classes had, I believe there are at least a couple guys in this draft who will be better than anyone currently on the roster. Who they are, I can’t say, but they’ll probably get taken ahead of the Pistons’ pick at 8th.

    • May 31, 20137:25 pm
      by frankie d

      Reply

      have to disagree.
      i think detroit will have a shot at one of several guys:bennett, zeller or mccollum.
      either one of those guys will be able to force their way into the rotation.
      i think all 3 of those guys are ready to step in and play 20 minutes a game. 

      • Jun 3, 20138:27 am
        by G

        Reply

        I agree, they’ll have a shot at picking any of those 3 guys. The thing is, back when they were in the #5 slot, they had a shot at Porter, Oladipo, Burke, or even McLemore (long shot, but still). The difference is one of the guys I named would’ve been one of the Pistons’ best players at some point, while the guys you named could make the starting rotation at some point.

    • May 31, 20137:43 pm
      by Otis

      Reply

      Amen. All the propaganda from this MESS of a front office is laced with agenda. I’d entertain the idea that he’s also hedging his bets in case the pick doesn’t pan out, but I think you hit the nail on the head.
       
      I’m all about integrity, but there’s things a TERRIBLE team can do to position itself to be successful in the future, and this terrible team staunchly refuses to do any of them. The first of which is to get out of this state of denial that the franchise is in good shape, and the first hint I ever saw of that (Joe saying: “We’ll be good again.”) happened to coincide with the SHOCK-THE-WORLD .500 run the team closed 2012 on, which instantly gave Joe all the brain fodder he needed to convince himself that the team was somehow headed somewhere (pssst. it wasn’t and never appeared to be).
       
      If Gores has half a brain (and this is a legitimate “IF” until we see otherwise) he probably understands that winning meaningless games at the end of UTTERLY WASTED seasons doesn’t accomplish anything. If this team had a bright outlook, or was even really building something, they could afford to win those games for the sake of progress. But as it stands, this team is several MAJOR pieces away from even being “on the right track” in terms of fielding a respectable team (no true ANSWERS at any position except for center, and you’ve got two of them who may or may not excel together). Say what you want about Cleveland, but they lost the best player in the league to free agency and are already light years ahead of us in terms of fielding a quality team. Meanwhile, they’ve been COLLECTING draft picks instead of selling them like idiots. Who wouldn’t stomach the sideways glances of the Integrity Police if it means Kyrie Irving is running your offense instead of NOBODY. Small karmic price to pay, I say. So yeah, he’s going to be in a perpetual state of having some ‘splaining to do until he’s inevitably fired because he has no answers and no magic and should have been gone a very long time ago.

  • May 31, 20134:05 pm
    by tarsier

    Reply

    Are you really claiming that the 2000 draft had a franchise changer?

    Also, are you claiming that a player peaking with one season as good as 94-95 Olajuwon qualifies as a franchise changer?

    To change a franchise, I think you need sustained greatness, not one strong season. 

    • May 31, 20134:33 pm
      by G

      Reply

      First, you need a baseline metric to evaluate drafts for something a nebulous as a “franchise changer”. If it’s not based off of a single season’s WS, what do you use? All Star teams made? Too many snubs & bums based on stupid voting. What about 3 year peak in WS?

      Redd was hurt by his inability to stay healthy. To have a high WS number, a player has to play a lot of minutes. Redd only had 3 seasons with at least 2,800 minutes, finishing with WS of 10.8, 9.7 and 6.2. He probably would’ve had over 10 WS in his ’03 season, but Redd only played 2,300 minutes that year.

      To put it in perspective, Redd’s ’06 season puts him on par with Kobe’s year this year. His ’04 season is on par with Wade’s and Anthony’s production this year, and his ’03 season is similar to Duncan, Splitter or Randolph’s season this year. Those aren’t necessarily SUPERSTAR numbers, but he would’ve been the #1 or #2 guy on any team in the league in those years.

      • May 31, 20134:56 pm
        by tarsier

        Reply

        I believe Redd could have been a “franchise changer” if he could have stayed healthy. But just as that hurts his win shares, it hurts his less analytical evaluation.

        I think a much better definition would be at least 4 years of 10 win shares or better or at least 8 years of 8 or better or something like that. 

    • May 31, 20134:39 pm
      by G

      Reply

      To flip the question a little, is Greg Monroe a “franchise changer”? I think Dumars probably considers him to be, yet he’s only posted 1 season that would’ve been in danger of catching any of Redd’s top 3 had he gotten the minutes. Monroe’s got time to grow & improve, but I think it’s presumptuous to assume that a) he’s a franchise changer and b) that there isn’t anyone better than Monroe in this draft.

      • May 31, 20134:58 pm
        by tarsier

        Reply

        Agreed on both your a and b. Dumars comment was absurd. But a claim that every draft has a “franchise changer” in it is setting the bar for that term really low.

        • Jun 3, 201310:56 am
          by G

          Reply

          “Franchise changer” isn’t “franchise player”. There don’t appear to be any superstars in this draft, but I think there are several players in it that could change the course of a franchise. Not by themselves necessarily, but look at what getting a guy like Klay Thompson did for the Warriors.

          I think of “franchise changers” as guys who can help the team turn a corner – like the Pistons drafting Dumars… There are a lot of guys I’d call “franchise changers” who weren’t the best player on their respective teams. Isiah could only take the Pistons so far before they got Dumars. Jordan never won without Pippen. Heck, Chandler Parsons looked like a franchise changer to me this year. Without him, Houston doesn’t make the playoffs.

  • May 31, 20135:02 pm
    by Quick Darshan

    Reply

    I agree with Dumars.  I don’t see many franchise changers.  I think Victor Oladipo has the potential.  As does Nerlens Noel.  Maybe Adetokunbo.  And there’s an off-chance that Zeller could be.

    I think it’s a deep draft for role-players and there will be a lot of solid NBA careers to come of this draft, but almost none that change the course of a franchise.

    Luckily, the Pistons already have a potential franchise-changer in Andre Drummond. 

    • May 31, 20135:15 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      Any of the top 6 could be. And probably at least two will be. And probably at least two others from the rest of the draft.

      Oladipo is actually probably one of the least likely to be among the top picks. He is a safe pick but with limited upside. He just isn’t an offensive force. 

      • May 31, 20136:30 pm
        by tom

        Reply

        Victor Oladipo does not have limited upside. His upside is Dwayne Wade.
         

        • May 31, 20136:38 pm
          by The Rake

          Reply

          Yeah, his upside is about as well as Wade’s playing right now, which is dog shit. Wade sucks these days and Oladipo has talent, but a boatload of holes in his game too. I like the athleticism and defensive intensity. His offensive skill set and turnovers leave something to be desired. No matter, he isnt ending up in Detroit barring a major, major shake up. 

        • May 31, 20137:27 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Can you seriously see Oladipo leading the league in scoring?

          • May 31, 20137:44 pm
            by Otis

            Uhhhhhhh… I could see him leading the PISTONS in scoring. Isn’t that enough?

          • May 31, 20138:03 pm
            by tarsier

            Wade led the league. Oladipo’s upside is well short of that.

  • May 31, 20135:23 pm
    by hoophabit

    Reply

    As has been noted, what does a “franchise changer” really mean?  I guess if your meaning is a “can’t miss” superstar, then there’s plenty of reason to doubt this draft.  At the same time there is good reason to expect that some player or players will prove more effective in the NBA than anticipated, and will play a significant role for some team.  Getting one of these pleasant surprises can have a big impact on a franchise.  As has been proven time and again, the draft is a crap shoot.  Even the “can’t miss” sometimes do.

  • May 31, 20135:26 pm
    by Max

    Reply

    Haven’t commented in a while here but this article prompted me.   Personally, I would define a franchise changer as a year in and year out top five player in the league and at worst a top ten player–someone who at least makes all nba first to third teams nearly every year of their prime.    There are plenty of drafts that have not produced a player who meets such a criteria.   

  • May 31, 20136:08 pm
    by Reaction

    Reply

    Larry Drew signed with the Bucks now

  • May 31, 20136:09 pm
    by Desolation Row

    Reply

    Might also be worth discussing the context in which Dumars is speaking. In other words, he might be dumbing it down for Gores, trying to explain to him the lack of an LBJ-type in this draft rather than saying there would be no future all-star in this draft. His measurement, within the context of which he was speaking, might greatly differ from what we’d consider a franchise changer. 

    Regardless, Dumars should be measured by his free agency moves and not how he drafts this year; the draft is too unpredictable and it may be too early to even make a call on how good of a player said pick will turn out to be by the time it comes to evaluate Dumars’ future with the Pistons. 

  • May 31, 20136:35 pm
    by The Rake

    Reply

    Fucking “win-shares”?? Sounds too much like WAR in baseball to me, which is completely worthless. 

    I’m not gonna pick apart a brief statement by JD and attack the man, it seems silly. As the man above stated, I;ll judge him based on how the team does. We all know he is on a short leash. Him declaring no franchise changers is both A) no big deal and B) something to say when you know you have the 8th pick. I don’t see that as a problem at all. As for the contract to Charlie V, oh thats a big fucking problem, soon to come off the books.

  • May 31, 20136:40 pm
    by The Rake

    Reply

    Actually, come to think about it, this draft has a shitload of franchise changers cause at some point a GM or two is gonna over pay for one of these guys services and cripple a franchise in a negative way. Damn, Joe D was wrong…

  • May 31, 20136:47 pm
    by Vic

    Reply

    There are franchise changers in every draft… I just hope Gms like joe say this stuff as a smokescreen.

    Because smart gMs like the Spurs and OKC and more recently the Rockets realize that the draft is the smartest way to get talent, and that franchise winning talent can be found by smart team builders anywhere 1-60, and overseas.

    How many championships do the Spurs win without Manu? Do they make the finals this year without Kahwi? Nope. That’s franchise changing. While our dynasty was shortened by stupid drafting and free agent overspending. 

  • May 31, 20136:51 pm
    by Martin

    Reply

    Maybe joe dumars is just playing games by saying that there’s no franchise player, maybe he actually sees a player that cn change everything. 

  • May 31, 20137:13 pm
    by Coach_Ackley

    Reply

    Well Larry Drew won’t be interviewing for the Pistons head coach as he just took the Bucks job…

    • Jun 1, 20137:52 am
      by sop

      Reply

      depressing mostly because the Kings, Bobcats, and Bucks have all filled their vacancies while we sit around and wait for what exactly? Brian Shaw to get finished with the playoffs? Dumars to decide between McMillian and Cheeks?

  • May 31, 20138:03 pm
    by Mythx

    Reply

    I have an idea. Instead of worrying about a franchise changer how about adding another solid talent.  We should not be trying to follow the Miami blueprint (its simply not possible). We should be following the Indiana one.
    Solid players at all positions, good depth and very good size in the frontcourt. If that is the model then the Pistons are already a decent chunk of the way there.  Drummond and Monroe starting, Singler,Jerebko coming off the bench. They clearly need a starter at the 1,2 or 3 from this draft and they need to use their cap space for a solid competitive vet (ala David West). I think realistically unless someone unexpected falls to the them in the draft their best bets would be draft McCollum, sign Igoudala and trade the expiring contracts of Stucky and Charlie V to Orlando for Afllalo and Glen Davis.  

    • May 31, 20138:40 pm
      by Jopl

      Reply

      Is 5 players deep (6 including Granger) solid depth?

      • Jun 2, 20137:27 am
        by ryan

        Reply

        Hansbrough is a nice forward off the bench who can finish  in many ways and knows exactly his role.

        Augustin is a talented guard who can put up some points in a hurry, but with this team just needs to not turn the ball over and stay in front of the guards.

        Mahinmi is an average backup center…can block some shots..not a huge liability anywhere.

        Sam Young is typical 10th man…with Indy he’s the 8th man…but not a weakness,. could have a better wing here but certainly could have worse. 

        Gerald Green is a nice regular season contributor but not any minuted to be had out there. 

        I would say Indiana has ok depth….A big effort from Hansbrough in GM 7 could be just the recipe to get them over the edge….depth much?

        • Jun 3, 201312:25 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Indiana’s depth is just awful. Their starting 5 is always killing it. But they do not have a single other lineup that has been able to produce a positive outcome.

    • Jun 1, 20135:34 am
      by Greg

      Reply

      You really don´t want to sign Iguodala, he´s just to expensive and is already declining. Orlando will also not do that trade, they are rumored to offer affalo to the Clippers for Bledsoe and Affalo and Davis aren´t the type of players Detroit should go after. If you want a Veteran SF I´d still go  to call the Mavs for Shwan Marion and their Draft Pick at #13 which they are rumored to be shopping to land either Dwight or CP3. With #8 and #13 the Pistons can land every combination of Bennett, Len, Zeller, Carter-Williams, Caldwell-Pope, Muhammed and would add a solid Veteran at SF who could be shopped to a Contender. I don´´t know what Dallas would ask for, but I know they don´t want Salary back. Maybe you don´t even have to give something in return. Remember the Ben Gordon trade? Detroit gave a Draft Pick to the Bobcats for them to pay an additional year, just as we would do with Marion.

  • May 31, 20138:48 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    In the last 10 years, how many franchise changer have their been?

     

    • May 31, 20139:24 pm
      by Sop

      Reply

      Why don’t we change it to “Franchise-definers” for over decade+ (aka bonafide superstars) just to be clear. I would say 7: KD, Rose, Kyrie, Dwight, Chris Paul, Deron Williams, and Westbrook. Now you could also make a case for Harden, Curry, Griffin, Love and Paul George but that’s about it.

      • May 31, 201311:52 pm
        by jacob

        Reply

        I would wait to say Kyrie is that good. He hardly plays. Do you think the Heat would be that good if James only played half of every season and was always nicked up?
         Also Curry and Love seem to be always hurt. Look at Dwayne Wade now, he looks about like stuckey if you ask me just an ok SG. So your list might as well include Greg Oden. 

  • May 31, 20139:45 pm
    by Grizz

    Reply

    Great article, Dan Feldman … to the point … true … and does some real good because no way do we want Joe Dumars to think he can use the excuse of screwinig up the draft picks because there was no one worth taking ..

  • May 31, 201310:08 pm
    by Combo Guards VS Logic

    Reply

    I’m starting to believe more and more that Cody Zeller could be a franchise player.

    • Jun 1, 201312:21 am
      by jacob

      Reply

      Maybe, we could use another big man. I would still like us to consider Shabazz he may not be perfect but it looks like he can score. If we did take Zeller I would consider trading Greg Monroe, but only for players like Love Rondo, or a package of good young players. Anything less and there would be no way.

      • Jun 1, 20139:06 am
        by Combo Guards VS Logic

        Reply

        I think Zeller compliments Drummond way more. I don’t see Moose ever developing a consistent mid range jump shot, and Zellcan has shown in workouts that he can hit 3′s. He’s also more athletic than Monroe so if he is on the board when it’s our turn, I wouldn’t be mad if we got him then traded Monroe

        • Jun 3, 20139:06 am
          by G

          Reply

          Anybody can hit a few threes in practice. Zeller took 2 threes all year, and none the year before. Until he starts hitting them in games, he can’t do it. Zeller would offer a more athletic player at the 4, but I doubt he’ll be better than Monroe.

          Offensively, Zeller has really only used post up moves, which most people doubt will work in the NBA. Monroe has a post game that works. Zeller’s mid-range game is basically the same as Monroe’s right now – a work in progress. And Monroe is the better rebounder BY FAR.

          • Jun 3, 201312:27 pm
            by tarsier

            He may not shoot threes, but he has more range than Monroe. That said, I’d way, way rather have Monroe.

  • May 31, 201310:21 pm
    by Jon

    Reply

    I agree with Joe D.  This draft is weak and when Joe talks about a franchise changer, there havn’t been many.  John Wall hasn’t changed a thing in Washington.  Demarcus Cousins is just potential until he grows up.  I wouldn’t even consider Kyrie a FRANCHISE changer.  They are ballers for sure, but franchise players are rare.  I’m sure Joe D is talking amongst stars like Derrick Rose, Dwayne Wade, Stephen Curry, and not Greg Monroe.  These guys step on the floor and defenders can’t stop them.  Period.  They can only stop themselves from scoring.  That’s what I think Joe D is talking about.  I’m sure there will be good role players and slightly better than role players to come out of this draft.  But not stars.

    • May 31, 201311:57 pm
      by jacob

      Reply

      This is so hard to predict go back and look at the last 10 drafts. Look at all the lottery picks that aren’t even playing anymore. Then look at how many guys were passed over that are stars now. Also Joe D did put together a team that made 6 straight eastern conference finals. 2 straight Championship games should have won both and if the refs didn’t suck probably should have beat the Heat in 06. How many other GMs have done that??????? I know it has been bad lately, but everyone acts like its so easy to just find all the right talent and just like magic they all fit together.

    • Jun 1, 20131:13 am
      by tarsier

      Reply

      Give Wall some time.

    • Jun 3, 20139:19 am
      by G

      Reply

      First, Washington is a SHIT organization and you can’t blame that on Wall. Second, Wall was SWEET this year, just injured a lot.

      Maybe Joe D meant “top 5 player” when he said “franchise changer”, but I didn’t get that feeling. I got the feeling he meant “guy who can be at least the 2nd best player on a contender”. I think there are at least 3 players in this draft who fit that description. Joe Dumars was a “franchise changer”. So were Dan Marjele, Ray Allen, Pau Gasol, Marc Gasol, Manu Ginobili…

  • Jun 1, 20135:49 am
    by Mrshourite

    Reply

    I know this is off topic but with the Larry Drew hire (especially) it makes you wonder if we really are waiting for a particular candidate like Shaw for example. Since we haven’t hired anyone as of yet. There must be some truth to this Brian Shaw & Phil Jackson speculation. 

    As for that statement by Joe D, it’s understandable on several levels. I don’t know about “franchise players”, (mainly because the definition of franchise player isn’t very clear) but I’m sure there will be a couple of impact players in this draft. Is a franchise player viewed as the best player on each individual team, or if they’re considered the cream of the crop of the league like top 5-10 players? If its the former then I feel that there will be a few of those, but you never know…

     Seems like the last few years the trend has been to downplay the draft and label it weak by the self proclaimed pundits, and so called experts and then it seems we’re all pleasantly surprised by the turnout which gives them something else to report and us fans something more to talk about. 

  • Jun 1, 201311:48 am
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    shabazz because of his ability/kill to score the ball has that ability. 

  • Jun 1, 20131:13 pm
    by David

    Reply

    Yea, I think the Nets basically made a similar statement last year (I think Billy King claimed there were only 3 franchise players) when they traded a top 5 protected pick for Gerald Wallace which basically gave Lilllard to the Blazers. And let’s see, Lillard at 6, Barnes at 7, Drummond at 9. Seems like King was wrong last year and made a terrible trade (and not even including the cap space implications of a rookie salary vs Wallace’s 10million a year).

    You can’t know with any certainty the future NBA potential of 60 prospects based on a year or two of of college basketball and the combine. 

     I’m not saying he will,or even that it looks likely,  but Shabazz definitely has the potential to be a franchise player. So could Pope. And others.

  • Jun 1, 20132:23 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    That’s my point when I say that the talent seperation just is not in this draft

    • Jun 2, 20135:52 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      and your point is wrong

    • Jun 3, 201310:09 am
      by G

      Reply

      By way of example, would you rather have McLemore/McCollum or Tim Hardaway Jr/Jamal Franklin? Would you rather have Noel or Withey? Yes, there’s talent separation, there just isn’t top tier talent in this draft.

  • Jun 1, 20133:40 pm
    by Max

    Reply

    Another point about defining a franchise changing draft pick and especially given the criteria of producing a single season with a certain win share.   How many players didn’t have that single season for the team that drafted him?   Was Zach Randolph a franchise changer for Portland or New York?  Was Billups a franchise changer for Boston?   Contextually, we don’t even know whether Dumars means an immediate franchise changer or a long term one and it’s pretty unrealistic given the crap shoot of the draft in general, the injuries and pain threshold that test every player to expect anyone to project that a player will change a franchise into a contender beginning with his 5th NBA season or beyond.  .   

    Ultimately, none of us can say we know how Dumars would define a franchise changing player or how he represented that definition to Gores when they spoke,  He might actually mean a bona fide franchise player and I can easily imagine him saying something very obvious in that there are no LBJs or Duncans and not even a Ewing or Worthy to draft this year.   You know, players who are obviously ready to come in and put up big numbers right away and project as likely hall of famers even on draft night.  

  • Jun 1, 20136:20 pm
    by danny

    Reply

    Even if we can agree on that number as an agreeable threshold for a franchise changing player, it still doesnt do it justice to simply require a player to qualify with a single season of doing so. 

    I perceive ‘franchise changing player’ as a franchise player; a great player, and then-some perhaps. So I agree heavily with Joe on this. 

  • Jun 1, 20138:03 pm
    by Andre'

    Reply

    He’s not wrong, He just happens to have an opinion just like you……..

  • Jun 2, 201312:40 am
    by DTroyEveryThang

    Reply

    What you want Dumars to do? Lie to Gore? Ok, I got you Dumars, Shabazz is the next Paul George, McCollum is the next Steph Curry and Zellar is the next Kevin Love, now everybody should be happy! 

    • Jun 2, 20135:56 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      No, we want him to have a realistic view of the candidates in the draft so that he can make intelligent moves.

  • Jun 2, 201311:53 pm
    by T Casey

    Reply

    I don’t care what draft class you’re looking at, you’re likely not going to find a franchise player picking 7-10. And it’s not like Joe’s done well even when he had the opportunity for a franchise changer so that’s no consolation for me. Hell even when there were franchise changing players these past few years we still couldn’t manage great draft positioning.

    • Jun 3, 201310:19 am
      by G

      Reply

      I think that’s the point. Picking at #5, there was a shot at a franchise changer. Instead of shutting down Drummond and maybe even Knight, they went on yet another late-season charge and played themselves out of the top 6. This is Dumars’ thing, every year he refuses to tank and somehow gets them to play .500 ball in the last 10-12 games or so. It wouldn’t be so bad if they weren’t completely awful all those games before that.

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here