1997 Draft Discussion

All Draft related information will be here

Moderators: UOducksTK1, Zyme, lukeyrid13, Oregon Ownage

Post Reply
User avatar
jibbajabba614
Senior
Posts: 2410
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 6:32 pm
GM: Milwaukee Bucks GM

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by jibbajabba614 »

Yeah well KVH ended up being restricted and Billups got a bump in handles. Just going off of simming

So you could say pretty close.
JB
Three Star Recruit
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2022 6:49 pm

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by JB »

duckyoubeavers wrote:
JB wrote:Did everything I could to get into the top 3.

I would have taken TMac 1.
bold statement. i could see him over duncan as hes younger but hes basically a more raw kobe
All of them are gonna be sweet but yeah I woulda gone TMac, Kobe, TD in that order. More risk, more reward. I usually just take that approach when rebuilding but I understand not feeling that way if you're not as willing to roll the dice
Kings
User avatar
The Bean Regime
Senior
Posts: 2644
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 5:57 pm
GM: Minnesota Timberwolves GM

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by The Bean Regime »

I think JB just hasn't been around long enough to see how deadly the "amazing raw" descriptor is. :lol:

I'd probably take McGrady over Duncan since Duncan looks pretty meh (for a clear superstar prospect I mean :P ).

As for KVH and Cassell, quite low on both tbh. As far as #4s and #5s go, they seem very weak.
Last edited by The Bean Regime on Wed Jul 27, 2022 5:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
pistolpetejr
Senior
Posts: 2965
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 2:48 pm
GM: Los Angeles Clippers

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by pistolpetejr »

The Bean Regime wrote:I think JB just hasn't been around long enough to see how deadly the "amazing raw" descriptor is. :lol:

I'd probably take him over Duncan since Duncan looks pretty meh (for a clear superstar prospect I mean :P ).

As for KVH and Cassell, quite low on both tbh. As far as #4s and #5s go, they seem very weak.
I’m sure you mean Billups.

Tbh I don’t know why, but I have a feeling Billups is gonna be sick.
---
Image

PistolPeteJR
User avatar
The Bean Regime
Senior
Posts: 2644
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 5:57 pm
GM: Minnesota Timberwolves GM

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by The Bean Regime »

pistolpetejr wrote:
The Bean Regime wrote:I think JB just hasn't been around long enough to see how deadly the "amazing raw" descriptor is. :lol:

I'd probably take him over Duncan since Duncan looks pretty meh (for a clear superstar prospect I mean :P ).

As for KVH and Cassell, quite low on both tbh. As far as #4s and #5s go, they seem very weak.
I’m sure you mean Billups.

Tbh I don’t know why, but I have a feeling Billups is gonna be sick.
Yeah Billups :lol:
JB
Three Star Recruit
Posts: 392
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2022 6:49 pm

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by JB »

The Bean Regime wrote:I think JB just hasn't been around long enough to see how deadly the "amazing raw" descriptor is. :lol:

I'd probably take McGrady over Duncan since Duncan looks pretty meh (for a clear superstar prospect I mean :P ).

As for KVH and Cassell, quite low on both tbh. As far as #4s and #5s go, they seem very weak.
I didn't even really look at the descriptions, just the draft preview page
Kings
User avatar
duckyoubeavers
Sophomore
Posts: 1631
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:35 am
GM: Toronto Raptors GM

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by duckyoubeavers »

JB wrote:
duckyoubeavers wrote:
JB wrote:Did everything I could to get into the top 3.

I would have taken TMac 1.
bold statement. i could see him over duncan as hes younger but hes basically a more raw kobe
All of them are gonna be sweet but yeah I woulda gone TMac, Kobe, TD in that order. More risk, more reward. I usually just take that approach when rebuilding but I understand not feeling that way if you're not as willing to roll the dice
Seems like it's more risk same reward. Kobe and TMac have similar ceilings but Kobe is starting off with a higher floor
Raptors GM
User avatar
jibbajabba614
Senior
Posts: 2410
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 6:32 pm
GM: Milwaukee Bucks GM

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by jibbajabba614 »

The Bean Regime wrote:I think JB just hasn't been around long enough to see how deadly the "amazing raw" descriptor is. :lol:

I'd probably take McGrady over Duncan since Duncan looks pretty meh (for a clear superstar prospect I mean :P ).

As for KVH and Cassell, quite low on both tbh. As far as #4s and #5s go, they seem very weak.
I dunno. Bradley, Divac, Zo all started as prime rim protectors. Duncan already has an offensive game and rim protecting skill set.

If I wanted to build a contending in 2-3 seasons, I’d go Duncan

If I wanted to rebuild for 5-6 years, I’d go TMac

Amazing raw guys seem to reach full potential 4-5 seasons later
User avatar
dd10snoop28
Senior
Posts: 4821
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:06 am
GM: New Jersey Nets GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by dd10snoop28 »

draft kinda sucks outside of top 3
Image
User avatar
Craig
Senior
Posts: 2418
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 3:16 pm
GM: Phoenix Suns GM

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by Craig »

Well we dont need 10 all stars in every draft
SUNS GM
User avatar
dd10snoop28
Senior
Posts: 4821
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:06 am
GM: New Jersey Nets GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by dd10snoop28 »

true, past few drafts have been quite strong so I guess this is good for inflation
Image
User avatar
jibbajabba614
Senior
Posts: 2410
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 6:32 pm
GM: Milwaukee Bucks GM

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by jibbajabba614 »

dd10snoop28 wrote:draft kinda sucks outside of top 3
If going by RL, after Duncan, draft was pretty bust.

KVH became a role player. Tim Thomas a fourth option.

TMac was an unknown at 9… Billups bounced around league until ending up with Pistons.

Ownage putting Kobe in 97 made it much more interesting
User avatar
Zyme
All Pac-12
Posts: 5413
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:35 pm
GM: New York Knicks GM

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by Zyme »

dd10snoop28 wrote:true, past few drafts have been quite strong so I guess this is good for inflation
The Eddie Js of the world are healthy for the league but devestating for the teams. On the whole a necessary evil
DASL1 Rings: '93, '94

K's HOF:
Mark "Wholly Mammoth" Eaton | Retired 2002, age 44: 24 min/8pts/8reb/1stl/2.5 blks/1 TO
Michael "Sweet Home" Ansley | Retired 2007, age 42: 33 min/16pts/8 reb/1.5stl/.5 blks/.5 TO Lifetime .550 shooting %
Gheorghe "Ghiţă (Ghitza, Little George)" Mureșan | Retired 2008, age 36: 35Min/16.2pt/12.2reb/2.1ast/1.6stl/2.9blk/1.3TO (.461/.715/.000)
User avatar
The Bean Regime
Senior
Posts: 2644
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 5:57 pm
GM: Minnesota Timberwolves GM

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by The Bean Regime »

Craig wrote:Well we dont need 10 all stars in every draft
Well 3 all stars in a draft is pretty much the real-life minimum, so you'd hope for more than that. :P

KVH is looking a lot like Ferry who's probably had the best outside-PF seasons so far. LaPhonso Ellis worked out, but he was moved to SF pretty much immediately and only plays there, a luxury neither of the former 2 have.

Billups definitely has a more appealing foundation, but just lacks the little extra that nearly every other PG had coming in (Kenny Smith defense, KJ inside scoring, Payton defense, Mookie inside). His only B- being handling is a knock imo since that's always the easiest to develop (though handling itself not so much, but rather just passing affecting it so strongly).
User avatar
The Bean Regime
Senior
Posts: 2644
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 5:57 pm
GM: Minnesota Timberwolves GM

Re: 1997 Draft Discussion

Post by The Bean Regime »

Zyme wrote:
dd10snoop28 wrote:true, past few drafts have been quite strong so I guess this is good for inflation
The Eddie Js of the world are healthy for the league but devestating for the teams. On the whole a necessary evil
:lol:

Honestly a strong SG class too. Just so happened it wasn't because of him. :lol:
Post Reply