I also don't get too much into is player X better than player Y for the same draft class.
My take is just get a good player, and move on to fill out the rest of the roster.
Kevin Garnett might have been the best player from his draft class, but Minnesota didn't fill out the rest of their roster well for a long time.
If the Kings get a player, and he's a pretty good player, but still perhaps only the 2nd or 3rd best player in his class, I don't care as much. Just move onto the other positions, or the bench, or the coach, etc.
It's more about how the GM builds the team, to me.
You can always play the game "Imagine how good Team A would be if they had taken player D instead of player C" for any team, even when they're contenders. What if OKC had taken Noah or Jared Dudley or Carl Landry instead of Jeff Green?
Who cares at this point. OKC have build themselves into a contender anyways, they have a pretty good frontcourt despite not having Carl Landry or Noah because of Ibaka and Collison. And Durant/Sefolosha/Martin are a good swingman rotation, even without Dudley. No, I don't think their frontcourt is perfect, perhaps Landry's scoring in the paint, Noah's passing or rebounding might have helped even more. But they were still able to make moves to have good players in the frontcourt, SF/SG, and PG, and they're a contender, so no use looking back.
Similarly, with the Kings, just get a good player. Evans/Rubio/Holiday (I'm writing off Lawson, just not that impressed), or Cousins/Monroe/Bledsoe (tbd), or Fredette/Walker/Faried/Parsons, or Robinson/Lillard/Drummond/Barnes, just circle one from each group, get them to be reasonably good players, and move on.


Reply With Quote

Bookmarks